### CSS3 Paged Media 10 October 2006 Last Call Issues List

Issue 1

URI: http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/20061012004438.GB7613@ridley.dbaron.org;list=www-style

Description:
  The default value for 'image-position' should be 'center' rather than 'top left'.
Proposal:
  Accept the proposed change.
Resolution:
  Accepted
State:
  Closed

Issue 2

URI: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0062

Description:
  ;'fit-position' values out of sync with 'background-position'
Proposal:
  Accept the proposed change. (Editorial.)
Resolution:
  Accept
State:
  Closed

Issue 3

URI: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0066

Description:
  interaction of 'fit' and 'overflow' unclear
Proposal:
  Editorial improvements
Resolution:
  Accept
State:
  Closed

Issue 4

URI: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0078

Description:
  'fit' unclear in various ways

      The definition of the 'fit' property in [1] is unclear in the
      following ways:

       1. It should be clearer that it is describing the scaling of the
          *contents* of the replaced element rather than changing the
          replaced element's box (i.e., the used width and used height).

       2. It should avoid the use of the term "containing box" when it
          means the element's box.  (It could easily be confused with
          "containing block".)

       3. It should avoid the use of "replaced object" where the standard
          term is "replaced element".

Proposal:
  By and large, accept the proposed changes. (Editorial clarifications.)
Resolution:
  Accept
State:
  Closed

Issue 5

URI: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0079

Description:
  ;'fit:hidden' unclear for images without intrinsic dimensions
Proposal:
  Accept proposed editorial change
Resolution:
  Accept
State:
  Closed

Issue 6

URI: http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/20061013035200.GA24767@ridley.dbaron.org;list=www-style

Description:
  'fit' doesn't apply to images distorted by min/max-width/height
Proposal:
  Extend this property to apply when both 'width' and 'height' are 'auto' and min/max-width/height are used. Another way of saying this is, extend the property to provide the following additional use cases: preserving aspect ratio, scale a replaced element such that it is as large as possible within a given rectangular area; and similarly, preserving aspect ratio, scale a replaced element such that it is at least as large as a given rectangular area.
Resolution:
  After considerable discussion at the Nov 2006 f2f, the WG agreed to accept this proposal.
State:
  Closed

Issue 7

URI:

- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0084
- http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/78A3602ADF54BA4EAB53F378BF55588B01009CE5@G3W0067.americas.hpqcorp.net;list=www-style
- http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/20070410124711678736.14a1d61e@empyree.org;list=www-style

Description:
  Alias for margin-box names
Proposal:

      == Aliases for boxes ==

      Should
      * bottom-right-corner
      * bottom-left-corner
      * top-right-corner
      * top-left-corner

      have duplicates as

      * right-bottom-corner
      * left-bottom-corner
      * right-top-corner
      * right-bottom-corner

Discussion:
  The group feels that providing aliases does not necessarily lead to better usability; can't be done in all cases; and does not have general precedent.
Resolution:
  Rejected
State:
  Closed

Issue 8

URI:

- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0084
- http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/78A3602ADF54BA4EAB53F378BF55588B01009CE5@G3W0067.americas.hpqcorp.net;list=www-style
- http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/20070410124711678736.14a1d61e@empyree.org;list=www-style

Description:

      == Center and middle ==

Proposal:

      "Also, I personally consider middle as a one-dimension value while
      center is a two-dimension value"...

  Presumably, the request is to swap the terms 'center' and 'middle'.
Discussion
  These terms have been in place a long time, and that's what implementations are using. Dictionaries define these terms interchangeably. We don't see a need to change names at this point.
Resolution:
  Rejected
State:
  Closed

Issue 9

URI:

- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0084
- http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/78A3602ADF54BA4EAB53F378BF55588B01009CE5@G3W0067.americas.hpqcorp.net;list=www-style
- http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/20070410124711678736.14a1d61e@empyree.org;list=www-style

Description:
  Specification does not address 'how UA and CSS should work when it comes to headers and footers'.
Discussion:
  It is agreed that the headers/footers defined by Paged Media are subject to the same cascading model as other CSS properties, and refer to the same headers and footers as those currently accessible via user style dialogues. As the usual cascading model applies, no spec changes are necessary.
Resolution:
  Rejected
State:
  Closed

Issue 10

URI:

- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0084
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0105
- http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/78A3602ADF54BA4EAB53F378BF55588B01009CE5@G3W0067.americas.hpqcorp.net;list=www-style
- http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/20070410124711678736.14a1d61e@empyree.org;list=www-style

Description:
  - 'image-orientation' property isn't Paged Media-specific.
  - 'fit' property isn't Paged Media-specific.
Proposal:
Resolution:
  Not optimal, but pragmatic: these features were initially driven by the print community, so make some sense there; and are wanted in the market sooner than we can get there in 'Box'.; Rejected.
State:
  Closed

Issue 11

URI:

- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0102
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2007Apr/0083.html

Description:
  Various editorial suggestions.
Proposal:
  Accept editorial suggestions.
Resolution:
  Accept
State:
  Closed

Issue 12

URI:

- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0102
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2007Apr/0083.html

Description:

      "Section 3.4.1:

      This section lacks a normative reference for the definition of the
      grammar that is being used here. I think it is a bad idea to mix
      grammars as is done here. If EBNF would be used throughout this section,
      the requirement

        The value 'auto' may not be used as a page name and MUST be treated as
        a syntax error.

      would be unnecessary, it could be encoded in the grammar."

Discussion:
  He's right that we don't define the grammar of our grammar. Bert doesn't think there's a formal reference for our syntax. It's a superset of YACC. But we use the same syntax in CSS2.1. The WG feels it's sufficient. If Bjorn wants to contribute a complete grammar, that would be great.
Resolution:
  Rejected
State:
  Closed

Issue 13

URI:

- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0102
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2007Apr/0083.html

Description:

      "I think the "concatenating numbers" idiom to express the specificity is
      a very poor one, I would prefer to see this expressed as an array."

Proposal:
  Add wording from 2.1 "(in a number system with a large base)"
Resolution:
  Rejected; the idiom is the same as 2.1 and seems ok to the group.
State:
  Closed

Issue 14

URI:

- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0102
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2007Apr/0083.html

Description:
  "Section 3.5:
  I am worried about the list of properties here, I think it is not very
  precise, it is difficult to map this to CSS3 properties instead, and the
  specification would have to be updated whenever new properties should
  apply to the concepts defined herein."
Discussion:
  We want new CSS3 properties to apply to the page context without having to rev the specification, but we also want the detail for exactly which properties apply.; Agreed to create an appendix with the detailed list for CSS2.1 features.
Resolution:
  Accepted
State:
  Closed

Issue 15

URI:

- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0105
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0128
- http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/78A3602ADF54BA4EAB53F378BF55588B010AD9EB@G3W0067.americas.hpqcorp.net;list=www-style

Description:
  'fit' not generic enough, and doesn't allow scaling relative to intrinsic size.
Proposal:
  ..."replace fit with something like replaced-size or scale with a syntax like background-size."

         OR

      ..."replace 'none' with <percentage>, where <percentage> displays the image at a percentage
      of its intrinsic size"

Resolution:
  The WG feels that 'fit'/'image-scaling' addresses use cases where the image is scaled in various ways to fit a destination rectangle, and that it would be inappropriate overloading to add a use case to scale the image relative to the source size.; that would more suitably be another property. Rejected.
State:
  Closed

Issue 16

URI: http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/452D8191.4040202@inkedblade.net;list=w3c-css-wg
http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/78A3602ADF54BA4EAB53F378BF55588B47FA6A@G3W0067.americas.hpqcorp.net;list=w3c-css-wg
http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/4535AD7E.1040703@inkedblade.net;list=w3c-css-wg
http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/20061018044223.GA19484@ridley.dbaron.org;list=w3c-css-wg
http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/6.2.1.2.2.20061024082053.12a10290@namailhost.corp.adobe.com;list=w3c-css-wg
http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/453E313E.4000003@inkedblade.net;list=w3c-css-wg

Description:
  'image-orientation' text should clarify that the rotation is out-of-band to the CSS layout engine.
Proposal:
  By and large, accept the proposed word-smithing. Explicitly, the following has been incorporated into the 23 Mar 2007 group version at http://www.w3.org/Style/Group/css3-scr/css3-page.

  > 'image-orientation' specifies an orthogonal rotation to be applied to an image before it is laid out. CSS layout processing applies to the image after rotation. This implies, for example:

  > - The intrinsic height and width are derived from the rotated rather than the original image dimensions;
  > - The height (width) property applies to the vertical (horizontal) dimension of the image, after rotation.

Resolution:
  Accept
State:
  Closed

Issue 17

URI:

- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0128
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0128

Description:
  What is the use case for 'fit: none;'?
Proposal:
  Remove 'none'/'hidden' from 'fit'/'image-scaling'
Resolution:
  The WG felt that there wasn't a compelling use case for the 'none'/'hidden' value, and, given the concern, decided to remove this value. Accepted.
State:
  Closed

Issue 18

URI: http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/78A3602ADF54BA4EAB53F378BF55588B679CF0@G3W0067.americas.hpqcorp.net;list=w3c-css-wg

Description:
  'image-orientation' doesn't enable using image metadata.
Proposal:
  Add a value 'intrinsic' to allow the author to indicate that image metadata should be used to determine the desired rotation.
Resolution:
  Accepted; no group agreement yet on a value name.
State:
  Open

Issue 19

URI:

Description:
  'widows' and 'orphans' should talk about block level elements rather than paragraphs.
Proposal:
  Editorial change accepted. The following text has been incorporated into the 23 Mar 2007 draft:

  The 'orphans' property specifies the minimum number of line boxes in a block element that MUST be left at the bottom of a page. The 'widows' property specifies the minimum number of line boxes of a block element that MUST be left at the top of a page.

Resolution:
  Accept
State:
  Closed

Issue 20

URI: http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/456A86B6.8090007@inkedblade.net;list=w3c-css-wg

Description:
  'fit' wording improvements
Proposal:
  By and large, accept the proposed editorial changes.
Resolution:
  Accept
State:
  Closed

Issue 21

URI:

Description:
  Does terming ':first', ':left', etc. as 'page selectors' cause confusion? Should they be called 'page descriptors' or...?
Proposal:
  Rename 'page selectors' to 'page descriptors' or some such...
Resolution:
  The WG felt that no change was needed.
State:
  Closed

Issue 22

URI:

- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2007Jan/0067
- http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/78A3602ADF54BA4EAB53F378BF55588B010ADA9C@G3W0067.americas.hpqcorp.net;list=www-style

Description:
  What does "properties that can be used in the page context" mean?; Are other properties invalid or just ignored?
Discussion:
  The WG wants to keep the door open for new CSS3 properties to apply in the page context (so we don't want to say that other properties make the document invalid or even that they are to be ignored); but we need to deal with properties that make no sense in the page context as well (so we can't say that all properties apply). The WG agreed to say that behavior for properties other than those listed is explicitly not defined.
Resolution:
  Accepted
State:
  Closed

Issue

URI:

Description:
Proposal:
Resolution:
  =WG Discuss=
State:
  Open

Issue X

URI:

Description:
Proposal:
Resolution:
  =WG Discuss=
State:
  Open