Does Gecko 1.9.3 implement page-break-after:avoid?

[Georg Maaß]

Hi,

does Gecko (1.9.3) from trunk implement page-break-after:avoid?

I try to tell XulRunner not to brek after a headline but always to keep
headlines together with next block by setting the style attribute of the
headline, but it seems to be ignored. I always get the page break
between the headline (H2) and the next block (DIV)

<h2 style="page-break-after:avoid">Headline</h2>
<div style="text-align:center">
<img src="big_picture.png" alt="half page high"/><br/>
my picture
</div>

If I say page-break-before:always, the page brake is made at the correct
position, so that seems to be implemented, but I don't want to say where
to make a page breake, but want to say where not to make a page break.

[Asa Dotzler]

Not yet, from what I can see at
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=132035

- A

[Asa Dotzler]

Forgot to include this link.
https://developer.mozilla.org/Mozilla_CSS_support_chart From there, you
should be able to get a pretty good idea of the status of Gecko's CSS
support.

- A

[Georg Maaß]

Asa Dotzler wrote:
>> Not yet, from what I can see at
>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=132035

Thanks for the bug. My search for such a bug, did not find it.

> https://developer.mozilla.org/Mozilla_CSS_support_chart From there, you
> should be able to get a pretty good idea of the status of Gecko's CSS
> support.
>
> - A

This link always redirects to https://developer.mozilla.org/En

correct link seems to be

https://developer.mozilla.org/En/Mozilla_CSS_support_chart

[David E. Ross]

The page at that URI is "Mozilla CSS support chart", last updated 10 Mar
2010. With the highest version of Gecko on the page being 1.9.3, it
claims that all CSS 2.1 features are indeed implemented.

However, I noticed that page-break-after, page-break-before, and
page-break-inside are listed as CSS3 and as not yet implemented. The
latest draft of CSS 2.1 (8 Sep 2009) shows these in Section 13.3.1. See
<http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/page.html#page-breaks>. Thus, there are
indeed at least some CSS 2.1 features not yet implemented, among them
being the topic of this thread.

I have not checked to see if there are any other unimplemented CSS 2.1
features erroneously characterized as CSS 3 in the "Mozilla CSS support
chart".

--

David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>.

Anyone who thinks government owns a monopoly on inefficient, obstructive
bureaucracy has obviously never worked for a large corporation. © 1997