- From: Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 15:16:50 -0400
- To: "Scott Johnson" <sjohnson@mozilla.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Le Mar 20 août 2013 14:14, Scott Johnson a écrit : > Hi Gérard: > > Thus Spoke "Gérard Talbot": >> Your code (in your 4 columnbox-clip-* tests) could be improved and >> tweaked >> a bit >> - with a doctype decl. >> - removal of unnecessary code: div.clipwrapper is declared but not used >> - without prefix, column-gap is 0 but with vendor-prefix, *-column-gap >> is 1em >> - Opera 12.16 does not require a vendor-prefix; so, o-column-* can be >> safely removed > Thank you for this advice. I have updated the test cases so they have > these changes. >>> Finally, Presto, in the case of the transform, handles the situation as >>> it does in the relatively positioned case. Again, I think this is what >>> we want, but we should probably indicate the desired behavior in the >>> spec. >>> >>> Given all of this, I would recommend the following text in section 8.1: >>> >>> "Floated or in-flow content that extends into column gaps (e.g., long >>> words or images) is clipped in the middle of the column gap." >>> >>> be replaced with the following text: >>> >>> "Content within a multicolumn element that extends into column gaps >>> (e.g., long words or images) which is not absolutely or fixed >>> positioned >>> should be clipped in the middle of the column gap such that the content >>> displayed is that which lies within the rectangle that is the >>> intersection of the column box with width extending 1/2 of the way into >>> the column gap on either side of the column box, and the rectangle >>> representing the content's bounds after the positioning is applied." >> Scott, >> >> I believe I understand your proposed text but ... it would be best to >> break it into smaller sentences and/or smaller (main, secondary) >> propositions. A 82-word long sentence is not an ideal way to cover >> situations. >> >> Gérard > Yes, so this might take some iteration. I haven't written a > specification before. ;| > > How about the following: > > "Content within a multicolumn element that extends into column gaps > (e.g., long words or images) should be clipped in the middle of the > column gap. For content which is absolutely or fixed positioned, no > clipping should occur if overflow: visible is specified. For all other > content, the visible content should be that which lies within the > intersection of the bounds of the column box in which the content lies, > with width expanded to 1/2 the column gap on either side of the column > box, and the rectangle representing the content's bounds, after any > transformations have been applied." Scott, I am not a model of english mastery. I occasionally or often struggle with sentences of the spec. Others will certainly help you better, more than I could. I would be tempted to word this as following: Relatively positioned content is clipped at both column box boundaries with an expansion into 1/2 of column gap on either sides. or (better, I think) Relatively positioned content that would extend into (and beyond) column gaps on either side is clipped in the middle of the column gap. Suggestion: I would always want to be using and re-using the spec editor's own expressions for consistency. > Mainly, what I'm trying to get across here is that if we have a > relatively-positioned item such that it extends outside the column box > to the /left/, Right here, I suggest to adjust your http://people.mozilla.org/~sjohnson/junkyard/b700367/columnbox-clip-relpos.html test a bit so that the image would be indeed moving to the left so that the test would be actually testing this extending-(protruding into)-into-column-gap-at-the-left. I suggest to move the image further (or later) in the source so that it would appear in the 2nd column box and then change the code to img { position: relative; right: 30px; top: auto; } Gérard > we should be clipping this as well, not just if it > extends to the right, unless I'm mistaken about this? > > ~Scott -- CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011 http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/toc.html Contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/ Web authors' contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/web-authors-contributions-css21-testsuite.html
Received on Tuesday, 20 August 2013 19:17:22 UTC