- From: Rachel Andrew via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 19:25:37 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
@AmeliaBR just commented with the same concern I was developing while reading this thread today. It seems like we create a lot of additional complexity by making grid do a non-grid thing. Add to that the teaching issue, it's been tricky enough to explain one-dimensional vs. two-dimensional to authors, and encourage understanding of which layout method to use for which use case. I think that tying Masonry, which is more like flex than grid, to grid layout would be ultimately very confusing. An argument against making this a new thing is that we don't want to have to create a new layout type for everything the world comes up with. This is a reasonable concern, however given that a lot of the stuff this relates to is not in the grid spec but instead in Box Alignment and Sizing, and these things would need to account for any differences in Masonry over grid anyway, would that be such a problem? -- GitHub Notification of comment by rachelandrew Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4650#issuecomment-577345437 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 22 January 2020 19:25:38 UTC