Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-grid] axis names

The Working Group just discussed `axis names`, and agreed to the following resolutions:

* `RESOLVED: Remove these terms from the grid spec`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic: axis names<br>
&lt;dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1299<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: SelenIT commented that rachelandrew article had the opposite meaning of row-axis and column-axis as what's in the grid spec. We only use them in a handful of spaces and since most people learn grid from rachelandrew it's probably better to match her.<br>
&lt;dael> rachelandrew: I've commented before that people struggle to learn this. People are used to a main and a cross which you don't have in grid. People are explaining it all sorts of ways It's gone around and around.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: 3 options. 1 is don't change the spec 2 flip to match rachelandrew 3 remove termonology.<br>
&lt;fantasai> Reasoning for the spec is in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1299#issuecomment-298106439<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: I'm in favor or removing the termonology. Both schemes make sense. Flipping to the other doesn't have a compelling reason because other people will not understand. WE should use block and inline<br>
&lt;fantasai> terminology is in https://drafts.csswg.org/css-grid-1/#grid-concepts<br>
&lt;dael> rachelandrew: I prefer block and inline.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: rachelandrew can you fix and teach people the way we have intended this to be spec?<br>
&lt;dael> rachelandrew: I'd prefer us to use block and inline.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: I think it's fine but also spec what the row and columns are correctly.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Note that the axis names appear 3-5 times total.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: I'm slightly opposed because the column and row axis are something which applies to internal layout of grid. Easy to rationalize which is which. Even thought inline and block axis apply externally the two aren't nec the same.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Exactly the same.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Question...which is the row axis? Horz or vert?<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: Vertical.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: It's horizontal in the spec.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: If we want to match your head we need to flip.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: Row is if you add more rows so it's how it advance.<br>
&lt;dael> plinss: Thing you put in a row progress horizontally.<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: I hear these terms aren't used much in the spec. What damange does removal cause?<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Every time we use the terms we also call it block or inline in parans.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: There's no occurance of these terms where both aren't used.<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Usless terms. Cause confusion. WE should remove.<br>
&lt;ChrisL> row-progression-direction<br>
&lt;dael> RESOLVED: Remove these terms from the grid spec<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1299#issuecomment-380089499 using your GitHub account

Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2018 13:00:44 UTC