- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
- Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 16:05:18 +0900
- To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- CC: Morten Stenshorne <mstensho@opera.com>, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, www-style@w3.org
Le 04/06/2013 08:16, Håkon Wium Lie a écrit : > Morten Stenshorne wrote: > > > > Bert Bos<bert@w3.org> writes: > > > > Apart from this max(), the W is indeed the same in all three cases, so > > > how about showing just the three cases for N, like in your version, but > > > purely declaratively, and then the W separately: > > > > > > if column-width = auto then > > > N := column-count > > > else if column-count = auto then > > > N := max(1, floor((U + column-gap)/(column-width + column-gap))) > > > else > > > N := min(column-count, max(1, > > > floor((U + column-gap)/(column-width + column-gap)))) > > > > > > And: > > > > > > W := max(0, ((U + column-gap)/N - column-gap) > > > > Looks good. > > Done. > > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-multicol/#pseudo-algorithm Thanks. This applies the changes the Working Group resolved on at the last F2F meeting, and addresses the concerns I’ve been expressing since September last year about the "unknown available width" concept. Cheers, -- Simon Sapin
Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2013 07:05:50 UTC