W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2010

Re: Box Reordering

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 07:19:12 -0700
Cc: James Robinson <jamesr@chromium.org>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <95C78EDB-2780-494F-B280-D22D240D0D63@gmail.com>
To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
Why is reordering more important for flexbox than for table cells or inline-blocks or maybe even floated blocks? I understand wanting to limit the scope, but I don't see why flexboxes should be the corner of CSS to have this super-feature, instead of in other display/flow models.


On May 24, 2010, at 6:24 PM, Alex Mogilevsky wrote:

> Not really. As it is, having reordering in Flexbox complicates implementation.
>  
> I predict that somebody will fill a Flexbox with thousands of items and then use box-ordinal-group for sorting, and expect reasonable performance. Then Flexbox layout not only needs a secondary storage for child order and quicksort. Neither is rocket science, but if it needs to be there it really should have a strong reason.
>  
> I am not saying there is no reason for it. But I personally donít think there is a strong reason for it.
>  
> From: jamesr@google.com [mailto:jamesr@google.com] On Behalf Of James Robinson
> Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 6:09 PM
> To: Alex Mogilevsky
> Cc: Tab Atkins Jr.; www-style list
> Subject: Re: Box Reordering
>  
> How is that statement any different when applied only to flexbox?
>  
> - James
> 
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote:
> It would be a good idea to contain reordering within flexbox. Even there it seems optional. Applying it everywhere sounds interesting but it is a major complication for implementation and would need strong use cases.
> 
Received on Tuesday, 25 May 2010 14:19:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:27 GMT