- From: Sebastian Zartner via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 21:16:31 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Sorry for the late reply! > Is it right that if `nav-order: visual` is given to `#grid`, then the tab order is changed to `#btn1`, `#btn2`, `#btn5`, `#btn3`, `#btn6`, `#btn4`? No, it's `#btn1`, `#btn2`, `#btn5`, `#btn6`, `#btn3`, `#btn4`, as that's the visual order reading them from left to right, top to bottom. @fantasai Thank you for the references! With the move to GitHub, I often forget to search through www-style. And I obviously missed the previous discussion. Nonetheless, it looks like they overlap a lot. > I think `nav-order` needs less ambiguous keyword than `visual`. I'm totally open to better names. > It could be the directional keyword values to indicate the direction in which content is ordered on the screen. > As I mentioned in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1764#issuecomment-326227652, `row | column` or `inline | block` are the candidates. Repeating [my earlier statement](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1764#issuecomment-326274118), elements may not be aligned row- or column-wise. Also, elements are positioned in two dimensions, so only defining one direction might be confusing. So, maybe `reading-direction` or `writing-mode` (to reflect that it's related to the writing mode) would be a better fit? Sebastian -- GitHub Notification of comment by SebastianZ Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1764#issuecomment-329299407 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 13 September 2017 21:16:24 UTC