- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 14:53:52 -0800
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 12/17/2013 08:32 AM, Mihai Balan wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: fantasai [mailto:fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net] > Sent: Friday, December 13, 2013 12:55 AM > To: www-style@w3.org > Subject: Re: [css3-break] Empty fragmentainers > >> We've removed a bunch of the text (from "and no content-empty" >> to the end of the sentence), since it's actually redundant with the next sentence. Take a look and let us know if this seems to be clear enough now. >> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-break/#forced-breaks > > It's clearer, but not necessarily better :) > Since now there's only a recommendation about "Break as few > times as possible" (SHOULD? MAY?) it will make things harder > to test with regard to interoperability. In a scenario with > one small region and one big region, should content that > doesn't fit in the small region create an empty region and > be flowed in the big one? How about if we have 3 small regions > and a big one? How about 10 small regions and one big region? > Past which point the recommendation to not overflow the region > takes precedence over "break as few times as possible"? I don't know what to do here. :) Should we remove that sentence or replace it with something like "Don't break if it's not necessary to fit content within the fragmentainer"? I think we don't have that sentence for line breaking, and it's kindof obvious, so I don't mind not putting it in... but what would *you* like to see there? ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 13 January 2014 22:54:20 UTC