- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:43:50 -0800
- To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
- Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote: > ± From: fantasai [mailto:fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net] > ± Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 11:31 AM > ± > ± The convention is > ± > ± before > ± start + end > ± after > ± > ± Why aren't we using that convention? > > That is what I proposed for 'flex-align' values -- and actually implemented that, which is now embarrassing, as it is the only place where IE10 preview is different from 2009 spec. > > The reasoning for start/end was in fact to have same values as in grid. That and start/end being inline direction only in 50% of possible cases. Yeah, we don't use the four values in Flexbox because Flexbox's properties are relative to the main/cross axis, not the block/inline axis. I ended up with start/end because they're short for "main-start", "cross-end", etc., and those sound better than "main-before" or the like (and I couldn't come up with a good pair of unused words, either). It's unnecessary to use the full names since the axis is apparent from context in each property. Grid doesn't have quite as strong of an argument, as its directionality is indeed defined by the block/inline axis. Rows are *always* the inline-axis of the element, and columns are *always* the block-axis. As such, it may indeed make sense to use all four keywords in Grid. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2012 21:44:37 UTC