Re: [css-page-floats] The 'clear' values are backwards

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Johannes Wilm <johanneswilm@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:26 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Johannes Wilm <johanneswilm@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Say you have three top page floats right after oneanother at the start
>> > of a
>> > document. You want the first page float to be on a page with no other
>> > page
>> > floats and the subsequent two to be on the second page. How would you go
>> > about specifying the clear values for the three floats for that to
>> > happen
>> > according to your model?
>>
>> Note: this isn't "our model". It's the spec's current model, before
>> page floats are introduced.
>
> Yeah well, current floats cannot move things to new pages. So the page float
> spec will have to try to reinterpret what "clearing" means in the context of
> page floats, at least to some extend, and I'm trying to figure out how you
> guys would think is the most natural way of transferring what clear does
> today in a context of page floats.

We don't have to, and shouldn't, reinterpret anything. ^_^  Just
translate the concepts over directly, and then add new functionality
as required.

> As you know, there is a general argument to be made that page floats could
> possibly live better under a different property name because for some
> aspects page floats will have to work differently. This could possibly be
> another such aspect.
>
> If there is no good way of saying
>
> "I want this one float to be the first float on a new page and all the
> following floats to follow it on that page or subsequent pages, depending on
> availability of space"
>
> or alternatively
>
> "I want this float to be the last on this page and all subsequent floats to
> be put on the next and following pages, depending on availability of space"
>
> then I think we need a way of specifying that.
>
> Any suggestions for what that could look like?

Not off the top of my head, but I believe you that it's a reasonable
use-case.  Maybe a clear-after property?

~TJ

Received on Monday, 25 January 2016 23:06:38 UTC