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

Re: [css3-flexbox] flex-flow bikeshed

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 10:28:45 -0700
Message-ID: <4E5D1DCD.4030605@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 08/29/2011 04:03 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
> flex-flow seems really complicated. Unfortunately, I don't have anything new arguments against having so many possible values.
>
> If we're going to have all these options, we should at least be consistent with writing-mode. Specifically, horizontal-ltr |
> horizontal-rtl | vertical-ttb | vertical-btt, should be horizontal-lr | horizontal-rl | vertical-tb | vertical-bt.

Well, if we're going with a writing modes analogy (which we are),
the "inline" axis will be the the "main axis", and the "block" axis
will be the "cross axis".

In the 'flex-flow' value 'horizontal-rtl', the 'rtl' is indicating the
direction in the main axis, which is analogous to the inline direction.

In the 'writing-modes' value 'horizontal-rl', the 'rl' is indicating
the direction in the block axis, which is analogous to the cross axis.
The 'direction' value of 'rtl' indicates direction in the inline axis.

So if we go with
   main  : inline
   cross : block
Then we should have
   main  : inline : rtl
   cross : block  : rl

Which is the logic that was put in the draft. You could argue that
'wrap-left' should be 'wrap-rl', though.

~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 30 August 2011 17:29:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:43 GMT