Markup: Fixes from publication process meaningful from year-to-year #1011
Conversation
- Add version line to metadata - Add PDF script for parity with ECMA-262 - Subtle formatting fixes from 2024 and 2025 editions - Clarifying comment for future publishers (or myself next year)
gesa
changed the title
spec/index.html
Outdated
|
|
||
| /* These tables are too narrow for their captions */ | ||
| #table-sanctioned-single-unit-identifiers table, | ||
| #table-listformat-resolvedoptions-properties table { | ||
| width: 102mm; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is "table too narrow for its caption" actually a problem? And if so, could it be fixed in a more general way?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In print? Yeah, very much so that's a problem. In a multi-page print render, table caption widths end up constrained by table widths. This is a tradeoff we make so we can have consistent continuation captions when tables go beyond one page, but doesn't only impact long tables. So if a table is narrow and a caption is long, you end up with
Table N:
Lorem ipsum
dolor sit amet
consectetur
adipisicing
elit
I've picked the widths I've picked to try to balance table content with caption length but I'm not particularly attached to said widths.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd still like to avoid them, and especially to avoid referencing specific tables by ID. Does this general approach work with Prince?
emu-figure figure, emu-example figure, emu-table figure {
width: fit-content;
margin-left: auto;
margin-right: auto;
}
emu-figure figure .real-table, emu-example figure .real-table, emu-table figure .real-table {
width: 100%;
}There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, not how you'd hope. It works in that it makes all the tables 100% width as opposed to optimising for content, so it ultimately makes it less readable.
before
vs after
Maybe this is a good time to remind you that we have full control over "viewport" size when we publish. We know, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that it's going to be 210mm with extremely predictable rendering. So it's not like different viewers are going to see different wraps on the table.
Also table width need to be audited every year, so it's not like and editor changing a table's ID for some reason is going to lead to an unreadable table slipping into the published standard—that'll only happen if the document is not checked first, irrespective of what tweaks were made in previous years.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.