- From: Johannes Wilm <johannes@fiduswriter.org>
- Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 11:33:46 +0100
- To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Cc: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Rossen Atanassov <ratan@microsoft.com>, "Elika J. Etemad" <fantasai@inkedblade.net>
- Message-ID: <CABkgm-Taqp0StOm936DDNd_zCvWUrt3EsuLdzfz1Ri0p+AFJiQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 11:06 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Nov 6, 2015, at 12:33 AM, Johannes Wilm <johannes@fiduswriter.org> > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > On Nov 4, 2015, at 4:46 PM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote: >> > >> > - I am not comfortable with deciding on the syntax of page floats >> > before we decide on the semantics. We've had semantics in a spec >> > for a while, and I am arguing for syntax based on these semantics. >> > If we want different semantics, let's have that discussion. >> >> I think we should. I'm concerned that the current semantics may limit our >> choices of good 2D float semantics. >> > > The conclusion of my last two emails was that yes, we can have 2D light > without having to write a lot of very complex placement logic, but their > order will matter. > > "float: bottom left" means that the first priority is to float to the > bottom. That first priority is used to determine what space in the given > fragment is reserved for the page float in relation to other page floats. > The second priority is "left". So it will be floated to the left most part > of the area that has been reserved for it through means of the first > priority floating. > > "float: left bottom" means the opposite. > > The results will differ once there are several floats within the same > fragment. > > > And if a 'float: left bottom' is followed by a 'float: bottom left', > flowed by a 'float: left bottom', followed by a 'float: bottom left'? A > stair step arrangement? > The spec's placement logic does that any particular fragment can only host either top/bottom or left/right floats. So in the case you mention, the first one will be placed in one fragment, which will be able to host other left/right floats. The second will then be deferred to the next fragment. The third is also a left-float, so it can be placed in the current fragment. Because the left-floating is the prioritized direction, it will be placed to the right of the first float at the bottom of the page. > > This seems complicated and unnecessary to me, and breaks the normal > expectations of horizontal coming first when two values represent two axes > (X and Y, horizontal and vertical). And it is way too subtle to expect > authors to easily figure out that this ordering is significant to float > stacking. > > Well, floats are a complex thing, and we are trying to get it right rather than provide a lot of features that will just end in content breaking for no good reason. That's why I/we have spent the last few months trying to figure out how to do this. > I expect top and bottom to indicate where the float is placed prior to any > horizontal floating. don't see a great need to stack floats vertically, and > then wrap text around all of them. If that's needed, then another property > can be added, such as 'next-float: vertical'. But that needs a lot of > thought, and I'm happy if that isn't added until later. > One option is indeed to take away the four floats that have the inline float direction prioritized. This is a used feature that will have to be supported in print, but may be too complex for browsers. However if your point just is to make the syntax be "float: start end" then that's not a good solution -- it will break for those of us who have to support a float on the right and a float on the left in the same fragment anyway. That is a very common usage in print, and I suspect anyone wanting to have these types of floats for ebooks will also want them. > > > So if we change it from: > > "float: inline-start block-end" > > to just > > "float: end start" > > then we have lost a vital piece of information. So I don't think that is a > good idea. > > I agree with Tab that content should normally not overload fragments, but > it is not uncommon to have more than one float in a fragment. And authors > should be able to predict what happens then. > > -- > Johannes Wilm > Fidus Writer > http://www.fiduswriter.org > > -- Johannes Wilm Fidus Writer http://www.fiduswriter.org
Received on Friday, 6 November 2015 10:34:16 UTC