W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2011

Re: [css3-multicol] Intrinsic Widths of Multi-column elements (Take I)

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 20:35:33 -0700
Message-ID: <4DA90E85.4090108@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 04/15/2011 05:41 AM, Håkon Wium Lie wrote:
> Also sprach fantasai:
>
>   >  I've been thinking about multi-col shrinkwrap wwidths a lot due to
>   >  the interesting situations we get into with vertical-horizontal
>   >  mixed text. I think it's not very well defined in the multicol
>   >  spec right now, and I'd like us to do better and solve some more
>   >  use cases
>
> The current spec doesn't try to define shrink-to-fit, it just points out
> that it exits an uses the result in the pseudo-algorithm:
>
>     shrink-to-fit: this variable represents the result of a
>     shrink-to-fit computation. CSS does not define the exact algorithm.
>
>     http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-multicol/#pseudo-algorithm

Ah, I missed that sentence. Thanks for pointing it out. :)

> Shrink-to-fit is only used when the available width is unknown and
> either column-count or column-width is auto. So, this is an edge case
> and not a central part of multicol.
>
> Still, if we can find an accurate and sensible definition, it will
> be a good thing.

Yes. Especially as we start doing more fancy auto-sizing layouty
things, I think having a clear definition will become more important.

> There are some good arguments for keeping the current definition, though.
>
> First, the spec is in CR.
>
> Second, the current defintion will be one of least surprises. For
> example, if a float is changed into a multicol element, it will most
> likely retain its width.
>
> Third, the current defintion seems to be the natural fallout: all four
> browser implementations (webkit, mozilla, opera, IE10 (welcome!))
> retain the width as per the current spec. (Prince seems to turn off
> floating for multicol elements.)
>
> I'd therefore be hesitant to make changes at this stage.

Given, as you say, the current definition is no definition, I think
not changing it is fine for CSS3 Multi-col. :)

But going forward I'd like to have a definition that solves more
use cases than stability between multi-col and non-multi-col layout.

~fantasai
Received on Saturday, 16 April 2011 03:36:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:39 GMT