W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2011

Re: [css3-page] Rules for Pagination into Varying-Width Pages

From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 19:13:20 +1000
Message-ID: <4E82E530.8070308@css-class.com>
To: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
CC: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
On 28/09/2011 2:33 AM, David Hyatt wrote:
> On Sep 27, 2011, at 11:18 AM, Alan Stearns wrote:
>> On 9/26/11 5:41 PM, "Alex Mogilevsky"<alexmog@microsoft.com>  wrote:
>>> I like the "top of page" rule. It would make no sense to me if clearance could
>>> be applied to part of a block.
>>> I also agree that use cases with overlapping floats can only occur from bad
>>> design or misuse of content, so it doesn't matter all that much what the
>>> result is...
>> If it does not matter all that much, then why invent a new rule? I think
>> staggered content is always preferable to overlapping. I'm not entirely sure
>> whether staggering continuations are preferable to overriding author intent
>> by squeezing, but so far I haven't been convinced that the top-of-page
>> continuation rule is useful enough to warrant a new layout algorithm.
> I agree. I don't think we need this additional rule. It's not a clear benefit, so let's not complicate implementations with it.
> dave
> (hyatt@apple.com)

Would the float placeholder have to pulled from the flow and inserted 
later for a float to appear on a new page (which can overlap other 
floats). If not, I would suggest that it is the float placeholder that 
would have to be moved along with any static blocks or line boxes that 
come later in the source.

I myself believe this would complicate things.

Alan Gresley
Received on Wednesday, 28 September 2011 09:13:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:04 UTC