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

>>  (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.


'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 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:39 UTC