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

Re: [css3-flexbox] getting multiline flexbox back into the spec

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 10:19:07 -0700
Message-ID: <4E2EF70B.6010206@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 07/25/2011 11:46 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> Here's a slightly different suggestion inspired by something Shane
> worked out.  This one avoids any possible confusion with invalid
> combinations, and I think is easier to read:
>
> flex-direction:<orientation>  [<horizontal-dir>  <vertical-dir>?]?
> <orientation>  = _rows_ | columns | horizontal | vertical
> <horizontal-dir>  = ltr | rtl | _forward_ | reverse
> <vertical-dir>  = ttb | btt | _forward_ | reverse
>
> The first keyword, which is required, gives the general orientation -
> the first two are writing-mode dependent, the latter two are physical.
>   It specifies the axis on which the flexbox items will be laid out;
> lines will be stacked in the opposite axis.
>
> The second and third keywords, which are optional, specify,
> specifically, the direction in the (physical) horizontal axis and the
> vertical axis.  By doing it this way, you avoid any of the "mixing
> physical and logical" confusion - it's perfectly well-defined and easy
> to mix them, since you're specifically saying "use the logical
> direction in the horizontal axis" or whatever.

Actually, you're still making a mess. Even if it is a well-defined mess.

   flex-direction: rows forward reverse;

This will go forwards on the main axis if the writing mode is horizonal,
and backwards on the main axis of the writing mode is vertical. That
doesn't make any sense.

~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 26 July 2011 17:19:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:42 GMT