W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2012

Re: [css3-flexbox] flex-order shouldn't be specific to flexbox

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:48:30 -0700
Message-ID: <4F67C5CE.1020700@inkedblade.net>
To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 03/12/2012 03:30 AM, Alex Mogilevsky wrote:
>> From: fantasai [mailto:fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net]
>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 4:51 AM
>>
>> I think it's quite conceivable that we would want a reordering property for
>> other layout modes.
>>
>> For example, in Regions, to order items as they are assigned into a flow. It's
>> already a list of randomly-related elements; why not be able to rearrange them
>> from document order as well. (I'm not suggesting we do this now, but it's a
>> reasonable possibility imo.)
>>
>> Therefore, and since flex-order has nothing to do with flexing, I strongly
>> recommend changing its name to 'box-order'.
>
> Reordering is expensive and can be really complicated. Regions don't have it any more btw.
>
> I suppose 'box-order' will be a good name when there is another spec that defines what it
> does elsewhere. Then for flexbox it can be a synonym to 'flex-order', there are precedents
> for that...

Yes, but they aren't *good* precedents. They are unfortunate accidents of history, we
shouldn't be making more intentionally. :)

Imo 'box-order' is as good a name as 'flex-order'. Better, actually, because 'flex-order'
makes me think it has something to do with ordering flexing behavior, which it does not.

~fantasai
Received on Monday, 19 March 2012 23:49:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 03:48:52 GMT