W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2013

Re: [css3-gcpm] Running elements

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 09:09:39 -0700
Message-Id: <5AFCDC05-117B-4C0C-BCBF-DFB6B707335A@gmail.com>
Cc: "Cramer, Dave" <Dave.Cramer@hbgusa.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
> On Sep 25, 2013, at 11:58 AM, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello Dave,
> 
>> We often put chapter titles in running heads. Sometimes that title
>> may contain an italic word ("The Sinking of the Lusitania"). If we
>> use named strings for the running head, we lose the italic. If we
>> use running elements, we'd need to add a second copy of the chapter
>> title to the HTML, purely for the running head.
>> 
>> A third option would be useful to us—in addition to copying the
>> content (string) and moving the element(running element), I'd like
>> to be able to copy the element to a margin box.
> 
> Yes. This was part of GCPM ED until June, when I pruned features that
> had not been implemented. Here's a copy of th Jun 27 draft:
> 
>  http://people.opera.com/howcome/2013/gcpm/06-27.html
> 
> where one of the examples are:
> 
>  In this example, the element is copied into the running header but
>  it also keeps its normal place.
> 
>  title { position: running(header), normal }
>  @page { @top-center {
>    content: element(header) }
>  }
> 
> I'm happy to resurrect the feature, though -- it's very useful.
> Changing 'position' to take a comma-separated list is a big deal and
> there may be better ways to achieve the same.

It feels kind of strange to me to be using the 'position' property to get running headers. I think it would be more natural to extend the properties used for regions, which already do a lot of similar things. So, for instance, if the element is to be moved, not copied, then something like this:

title { flow-into: header running }
 @page { @top-center {
   flow-from: header;
   }
 }

Thus the "running" keyword would mean that the flow repeats on each page (like a header or footer) instead of flowing from page to page (like footnotes might), and that anything else with 'flow-into: header' (with or without the "running" keyword) would replace the existing 'header' flow. You could also add your 'element()' second arguments to 'flow-from', like this:

   flow-from: header first-except;

Those second arguments could be useful even if it wasn't a running flow.

Then, for Dave's use case, where the element is to be copied, not moved, we'd use a 'running-copy' keyword, instead of just 'running':

title { flow-into: header running-copy }

This to me feels right. It leverages what people would already know about flow-into and flow-from, styling with @region or ::region(), etc.

I'd like to use '::before' on the margin boxes, to pick up some of the string content ideas (note that the regions draft already allows the 'content' keyword in the 'flow-into' value):

title { 
  flow-into: HEADER content running;
  counter-increment: header;
}
 @page { @top-center {
   flow-from: HEADER;
   }
@top-center::before {
   content: "Chapter " counter(header) ": ";
   }
 }

This feels simpler and easier, and more consistent with region syntax, than the current or past gcpm equivalents.
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2013 16:10:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:15 UTC