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

Re: Box Reordering

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 12:32:29 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTilz5sDDMoc-dUlugM82NpQEfnhLehxbRKYsMcDQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Cc: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>, James Robinson <jamesr@chromium.org>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On May 25, 2010, at 10:55 AM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> think there is a strong need for box reordering, based on my own
>> experience as an author.  I think the need is particularly strong in
>> applications, but still mildly useful in documents.  However, I'm
>> willing to admit that CSS might not be the correct level for this.
>> XSLT has its own problems (namely, being and requiring XML), but
>> perhaps some other solution can be created for this.  The feature is
>> independent of the other flexbox-related features, at least.
>
> I wonder if it is the ability to set an arbitrary index number that causes
> the most pain for implementation? Would something like 'move-to(start | end
> | before | after | left | right | top | bottom) be any better? I imagine
> that would handle most of the use cases for CSS reordering. If two elements
> had the same thing (e.g. 'move-to(start)'), it could fall back to source
> order to determine which came first.
>
> 'move-to(before)' and 'move-to(top)' in lr tb languages would move the
> element to be in the first child position, but would not guarantee it was
> actually above the other siblings.

I think sorting with box-order would be useful and cool, actually.
^_^  I'd have to go back and examine places where I'd have liked to
have this functionality to see if this sort of limited reordering
would be useful.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 25 May 2010 19:33:26 GMT

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