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

RE: [css3-multicol] pseudo-algorithm

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 18:41:13 +0000
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
CC: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <045A765940533D4CA4933A4A7E32597E2AB5FB4D@TK5EX14MBXC120.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
[Brad Kemper:]
> There are plenty of times when I create a single column DIV in which the
> content is entirely hidden by overflow:hidden (and height:0). I am
> generally against the UA deciding what I _really_ want when I specify
> something rather exactly. If I do have a multicol element that can be
> sized downwards towards zero column widths, and if I do care about not
> letting it disappear entirely, and if I do want to prevent that by
> reducing the number of columns on narrow devices, then I can take care of
> that easily via media queries. Or, if I want to keep the column count but
> not let the columns get to narrow, then I can set a min-width on the
> multicol element. The point being, that is my choice.

The argument is not whether you should have that choice. The argument is
whether that should be the default behavior. I don't think people who want
to lay out text in a multicolumn element should have to do more work to
get a reasonable output because *some* people might want to use multicols
to do other things it was not designed for. Not only am I unable to
understand why I should prioritize unknown scenarios at the same level as
the primary use-case, but I have no way - by definition - to assert that
the current algorithm or your preferred behavior will work well for them
either.

At the very least, I strongly object to a default behavior that causes
content to appear/disappear/re-appear as available width changes. 
 
Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2011 18:41:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:37 GMT