[rfc-i] widowing controls [was: will <vspace=n> disappear]
Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Thu Oct 16 20:43:34 PDT 2014
On 17/10/2014 09:52, Joe Touch wrote:
> On 10/16/2014 1:40 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 2014-10-16 22:30, Joe Touch wrote:
>>> On 10/16/2014 12:39 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>>> (I agree that in the new regime we can't have an explicit page
>>>> break. I do wonder whether we don't need something explicit to
>>>> help the widow/orphan logic in some cases.)
>>> There are many cases where it's useful to control such things:
>>> - tables (either render it in a single screen/page or
>>> control where it breaks)
>> So you want to add a hint about what is a good point to break a table?
> Not so much where to break as where NOT to break:
> item break before? break after?
I can actually see two things I might want to say. They would
both be hints to the rendering algorithm.
important stuff that should be kept together if possible
> header yes no
> first 2 items no yes
> middle items yes yes
> last 2 items no after last item
> However, it might be useful to control that, for the same reason as with
> hierarchical lists. If you have a table with items that are grouped, you
> might want the same "keep with previous" or "keep with next" identifier
> that is currently useful for paragraphs and lists (though those don't
> appear to be in V3, I use them all the time in modern word processors)
>>> - lists, especially hierarchical ones
>>> (it's preferable to break only before toplevel items)
>> I think that rule could be automated, right?
> It could, but it's useful to have user ability to override.
More information about the rfc-interest