278251 - @media print (page-break functionality)

Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 132035

(Core :: DOM: CSS Object Model, defect)

Description

[Eric Wanchic]

I have a single file stylesheet using two media types: screen & print.

Apparently when viewing this my page(s) in print preview, page-break
functionality doesn't work; instead displaying one continuous page which is also
unscrollable.

Comment 1

[Eric Wanchic]

Attachment: Actual CSS file

Needed for testing

Comment 2

[Eric Wanchic]

Attachment: Graphic file

Comment 3

[Eric Wanchic]

Attachment: XHTML Strict 1.0 Example 01

Needed for Testing

Comment 4

[Eric Wanchic]

Attachment: XHTML Strict 1.0 Example 02

Needed For testing

Comment 5

[Eric Wanchic]

Attachment: XHTML Strict 1.0 Example 03

Needed for Testing

Comment 6

[Eric Wanchic]

Comment on attachment 171161 [details]
Graphic file

Not neccessarly needed

Comment 7

[Eric Wanchic]

Also to add, html pages have been validatied as XHTML 1.0 Strict, and CSS file
was validated correctly. These pages work with IE 6.0.2800.1106 and with outlook
2000 (when formated as a proper .mht file and sent as email)

Comment 8

[Anne (:annevk)]

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 132035 ***

Comment 9

[Eric Wanchic]

Please help me understand how and why this is a duplicate to Bug 132035? In fact
this bug is more related to Bug 24000, which was supposed to have been fixed
from earlier version (3 years ago), and is now apparently broken again. Bug
132035 talks about preventing breaks when breaks happen. Mine is the exact
opposite: I want breaks, and they are not happening. 

So in the end, if this is still related to 132035, what is my next recourse?
Should I reprint everything into 132035, including attachements? Thanks.

Comment 10

[Anne (:annevk)]

Mozilla only supports page-break-before:always and page-break-after:always that
bug is about fixing all page-break-* properties and their values.

If you are asking for page-break-* functionality, this is a duplicate of that
bug. Please do not the resolution unless you have very good reasons.

Comment 11

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

This is an automated message, with ID "auto-resolve01".

This bug has had no comments for a long time. Statistically, we have found that
bug reports that have not been confirmed by a second user after three months are
highly unlikely to be the source of a fix to the code.

While your input is very important to us, our resources are limited and so we
are asking for your help in focussing our efforts. If you can still reproduce
this problem in the latest version of the product (see below for how to obtain a
copy) or, for feature requests, if it's not present in the latest version and
you still believe we should implement it, please visit the URL of this bug
(given at the top of this mail) and add a comment to that effect, giving more
reproduction information if you have it.

If it is not a problem any longer, you need take no action. If this bug is not
changed in any way in the next two weeks, it will be automatically resolved.
Thank you for your help in this matter.

The latest beta releases can be obtained from:
Firefox:     http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/
Thunderbird: http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/releases/1.5beta1.html
Seamonkey:   http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/

Comment 12

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

This bug has been automatically resolved after a period of inactivity (see above
comment). If anyone thinks this is incorrect, they should feel free to reopen it.

Comment 13

[Eric Wanchic]

Sorry for not replying earlier.

I am currently using Mozilla Firefox 1.0.7 ( I assume still under Version 1.0
Branch. Please correct me if I'm wrong).

I tested my code again, and it still continues to work under IE (v
6.0.2800.1106) and it doesn't work with Mozilla Firefox 1.0.7

-----------------------------------------------
This is identical to Bug 24000 (Which I should have reopened, sorry) which was
fixed at one point 3 years ago, but now is broken again. It's silimar to Bug
132025 in that it deals with page-break-* (I've added myself to the CC list),
however the discussion has always been focused (and still is) on avoiding page
breaks [page-break-*:avoid], especially in situations of complex page layout.
This bug is different in that it specifically focuses on a specific and simple,
cut and dry, page break, "page-break-after: always;"

-----------------------------------------------
To restate the situation, I am trying to force paper page breaks.

In the file "Actual CSS file", the code of focus is:

@media print {
    BODY { page-break-after: avoid; }

    DIV.firstPage { page-break-after: always; }

    DIV.midPage { page-break-after: always; }

             }
----------------

When focusing on the "XHTML Strict 1.0 Example 01" file :
  <body>
    <div class="firstPage">
      ...
    </div>
    <div class="lastPage">
      ...
    </div>
  </body>

----------------

Inside the browser, one should see the "firstPage" DIV seemlessly connect with
the "lastPage" DIV, which it does. However in Print Preview mode, the two DIVs
should be divided up on two seperate sheets of paper, Page 1 and page 2. (Ignore
possible code bleeding on more than one page/multiple pages if present)

----------------

When focusing on the "XHTML Strict 1.0 Example 02" file :

  <body>
    <div class="firstPage">
      ...
    </div>
    <div class="lastPage">
      ...
    </div>
  </body>

----------------
Similiar as in Example 01

----------------

When focusing on the "XHTML Strict 1.0 Example 03" file :

  <body>
    <div class="firstPage">
      ...
    </div>
    <div class="midPage">
      ...
    </div>
    <div class="lastPage">
      ...
    </div>
  </body>

---------------
Similiar again in Example 01, and Example 02. Except that "midPage" DIV also
need to be page breaking, but it doesn't.


If there are any more questions or concerns, don't hesistate to ask. Thank you (^_^)

Comment 14

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

is it still broke after removing absolute positioning?  if so then this is a dup of 122750 - which has the same blocker as this bug (which was set by bz on 2-1-2005).

Comment 15

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

[slight correction] 122750 is also marked a dup of 154892, so if the symptoms are the same then this bug should be marked a dup of 154892, not 122750

Comment 16

[Andrew Hagen]

Resolving as duplicate. Reporter, do not reopen. It is very, very important that duplicate bugs be resolved as duplicates. This conserves scarce developer resources. Ultimately, it is necessary to getting bugs fixed. 

If this bug still exists, it is a duplicate of bug 132035 (which seeks a fix for our page-break-* support). 

We could use more testcases. It would be great to integrate your test case into a single (X)HTML file with inline or internal CSS styling. You can post that as an attachment to bug 132035. 

Bug 24000 has been resolved.