- From: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2015 14:17:58 +0200
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
> On 06 Jul 2015, at 23:56, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> wrote: >> On 7/2/15, 3:27 AM, "Florian Rivoal" <florian@rivoal.net> wrote: >>>> On 02 Jul 2015, at 00:31, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> wrote: >>>> How about: >>>> >>>> If a fragmentation context participates in layout containment, the first >>>> element with layout containment affecting the fragmentation context must >>>> “trap” the remainder of the fragmented flow. Fragmentation must not >>>> continue past the layout containment boundary. So the last fragment >>>> container within the first layout containment boundary is treated as if >>>> it >>>> is the last fragment container in its fragmentation context. >>> >>> Not bad :) You took something awkward to phrase, generalized it to a >>> broader >>> situation, and still managed to craft a sentence that makes sense. >>> >>> I'd add: >>> >>> If subsequent fragmentation containers in the fragmentation context >>> are only generated when more content remains in the fragmented flow, >>> then they are not generated. If they would exist regardless, they >>> remain part of the fragmentation context, but do no receive any content >>> from the fragmented flow. >>> >>> Specifically: >>> - CSS Regions following the one which traps the content are still >>> considered part of the region chain as returned by the >>> getRegions() method of the NamedFlow interface. >>> - the regionOverset attribute of the Region interface of the region >>> which traps the content is set to overset if the content doesn't >>> fit, even if it is not the last region in the region chain. >>> - If the computed value of the continue property on an element with >>> layout containment would otherwise have been ''auto'' or >>> ''fragments'', it must instead compute to ''overflow''. >> >> This all looks good to me. I like the general rules followed by specific >> applications of those rules. > > I like this as well, and would gladly accept a PR. There you go: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/34 - Florian
Received on Tuesday, 7 July 2015 12:18:29 UTC