- From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 06:46:22 -0800
- To: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>, Andrei Bucur <abucur@adobe.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 2/28/13 11:40 PM, "Simon Sapin" <simon.sapin@exyr.org> wrote: >Le 01/03/2013 00:11, Andrei Bucur a écrit : >> I also think it should be noted a propagated forced break does not >> apply if an unforced break already consumed the oportunity. For >> example, if there's an unforced break between the last child (that >> has break-after: always) of an element and the bottom border of it's >> containing element (e.g. the height of the container is taller than >> the fragmentainer) we stop propagating the break from the child to >> the parent beacuse the break occured naturally with the layout. > >I¹m not certain of all the corner cases, but I would have thought the >opposite: ignored unforced breaks if there is a forced break. This is >because we have many types of forced breaks. For example `break-after: >right` can generate an empty page in order to continue on a right page. So a forced break takes precedence, but the main concern is that an unforced break and a forced break (propagated or not) at the same break point results in a single break. Thanks, Alan
Received on Friday, 1 March 2013 14:46:53 UTC