- From: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 11:14:41 +1100
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: "www-style@gtalbot.org" <www-style@gtalbot.org>, www-style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
On 13/12/2012, at 11:11 AM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote: >> On 13/12/2012, at 10:21 AM, Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org> wrote: >> >>> I do not understand why Webkit can not implement orphans and widows >>> according to CSS2.1 specification. >>> >>> I do not understand why you say that it would break existing content. >> >> Because these properties have implied behaviour on content, even when >> they were never specified by the author. Now, after years, our implementation >> turns them on and things change. I doubt any author will understand >> why. Whether or not it is a positive change is important, but not really >> our decision to make. > > Yup. The initial value was chosen on the assumption that the behavior > change wouldn't break things, because it's a nice default. > > However, if you think that it'll cause content to break, then we > should obviously just be more conservative about things and set the > initial value to 1 (no effect) instead. I would accept that, although I still like 'auto' because it does open the door for the implementation to do cooler stuff, like realise that a widow here is ok because it will avoid a massive orphan break at the bottom the page. (We have no plans to do something like that) Dean
Received on Thursday, 13 December 2012 00:15:14 UTC