Re: [css3-multicol] pseudo-algorithm

On Feb 16, 2011, at 10:41 AM, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote:

> [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'm not sure it is. With the current algorithm, I can't guarantee the number of columns would be as specified, right, unless we introduce 'column-count-I-really-man-it'? That is the main thing I am arguing against, not whether or not gaps should be reduced in over-constrained situations (I'm still ambivalent about that one).

> Not only am I unable to
> understand why I should prioritize

"allow", not "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.

I'm fir the principle of least surprise. 

> At the very least, I strongly object to a default behavior that causes
> content to appear/disappear/re-appear as available width changes. 

Agreed.

Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2011 19:11:58 UTC