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

Re: [css3-regions][css3-exclusions][css3-gcpm] Plan B

From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 23:59:28 +0100
Message-ID: <20218.19920.592913.536787@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Tab wrote:

 > > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-gcpm/#exclusions
 > > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-gcpm/#regions
 > >
 > > For comparison purposes, I refer to the GCPM-based proposal as Plan B,
 > > and the set of proposals [9][10][11] championed by Microsoft and Adobe
 > > as "Plan A".
 > 
 > While I generally prefer the pseudo-element approach, basing it off of
 > multicol has some issues.  Namely, it's incompatible with new layout
 > modes like Flexbox and Grid.

That's a fair point. In general, it should be possible to specify any
declarations on columns/regions. E.g.:

  article::region(1) {
    display: flexbox;
  }

But not all combinations make sense. 

Could you describe a use case where you'd want to combine
regions/exclusions with flexbox?

 > (Also, Hakon, you broke the GCPM spec within the last couple of minutes.)

Something weird happened when I checked in a new version from a
connection that blocked certain ports. Fixed.

-h&kon
              Håkon Wium Lie                          CTO °þe®ª
howcome@opera.com                  http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:00:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:47 GMT