- From: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 11:42:20 +0900
- To: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
- Cc: Robert Hogan <robhogan@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
> On Jan 7, 2017, at 05:18, François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote: > > I thought it was what browsers were doing so that is what I initially intended, but matching current implementations when they agree on a result is what we want, not to define a new behavior, so I would like to clarify that to mention any part of a row and not necessarily a row in full. Do you have test cases (even informal ones) for that? I agree that we want to match current implementations when they agree rather than define a new behavior, but when it comes to table fragmentation, I think we ought to include non-browser implementations as well (vivliostyle, prince, antenna house, pdf reactor...), as they tend to have paid a lot more attention to fragmentation than browsers have. I have not run the tests, so I don't know if they're different or not. And even if they are, maybe we'll want to overrule them. But we should at least check. —Florian
Received on Saturday, 7 January 2017 02:42:55 UTC