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

Re: [css3-multicol] overflow and paging?

From: Shelby Moore <shelby@coolpage.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 14:36:45 -0400
Message-ID: <a6f5c276456c6164cc50dbbc8eaba7e8.squirrel@sm.webmail.pair.com>
To: shelby@coolpage.com
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com>, www-style@w3.org
[snip]

>>  (If
>> you have padding/border/etc, you'll have to use a calc() to get the
>> value right.)
>
>
> Hmmm. I am thinking off-top-of-head that should automatically calc? IMO,
> we always want the column-height to fit within the outer container's clip
> by default, if for no other reason, because it is the only way to make
> accessibility work correctly by default.


Correction, the following case didn't apply to calc issue above:

>  Also to prevent those visually
> inconspicious flow order errors that I was describing.

more below...


>>> Minor rant: why in CSS do we have to say "width (aka inline
>>> direction)"?
>>> Why couldn't we reuse the same term?  Is width never in the inline
>>> direction?  Then why do we say that "column-width" always applies to
>>> the
>>> "inline direction"?  Should it be named "column-inline-length" instead?
>>>
>>> This is making the discussion and teaching of CSS columns very
>>> difficult
>>> and verbose.  Can we fix this?
>>
>> "width" is the extent in the horizontal direction.  In vertical text,
>> this is not the same as the inline direction.
>>
>> We could fix this in the same way we fixed the physical dependency of
>> top/right/bottom/left, by coming up with a pair of logical-direction
>> keywords to use in place of width/height.  No one's come up with a
>> good set yet, though.  (I think last time the discussion came up, we
>> were happy to use "length" for one of them, probably height, but
>> couldn't come up with a good one for width.)
>
> From my crap ideas, may spring some good ones :D
>
> Seems to me best are "inline-length" and "block-length".  So I would
> prefer "column-inline-length" and "column-block-length" instead of
> "column-width" and "column-height".  But when are the width and height not
> logical any way?  Width on a block element is always the inline length
> correct?  If no, then using the "column-block-length" would eliminate the
> confusion where people confuse it with the content height and the height
> of the multi-column element.


Idea:

'xwidth' is better for viewport horizontal.
'width' is better for inline direction width.

'yheight' is better for viewport vertical.
'height' is better for block direction height.

Or you could reverse those.

I think that would help a lot to avoid confusion. I don't even know which
is which in the CSS usage.  I would have to go dig to find the answer.




>
>
> "flowx" and "flowy"
>
> "textx" and "texty"
>
> southern humor:(hang a) "louie" and "reggie"
>
Received on Friday, 15 October 2010 18:37:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:32 GMT