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

Re: [css3-flexbox] Bikeshed ALL the things

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 12:00:15 -0700
Message-ID: <4FBE853F.1060902@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 05/24/2012 07:51 AM, Brad Kemper wrote:
>
> Another argument for (1) is that it is hard to remember which of the start/end or before/after pairs are for inline/x axis and which are for block-progression/y axis. You can remove the space "before" or "after" the glyphs on a line, just as you can remove it from where the blocks "start" or "end". I don't imagine most authors would be good at remembering which is which, because it it not intuitive.
>
> I'd call my view argument (1.1). We should use the same word for both directions, perhaps with a prefix when more clarity is needed. But "start" and "end" are not opposites. The opposite of "start" is "finish", and the opposite of "end" is "begin" or "beginning". So, I would say, use 'align-items: beginning | end' ('begin' sounds too much like the verb, and 'ending' sounds too much like the end of a story), 'text-align: beginning | end', 'block-align: beginning | end', 'grid-column/row-align: beginning | end'.

As Tab noted, the start/end pair is well-established already,
so we won't change that to beginning/end (besides, we should
avoid 'ing' endings).

The idea of using prefixes to disambiguate is an interesting
one. I'm not sure it works so well with e.g. margin-inline-start,
or in cases where we think we only need one pair, but wind up
adding a second later (this has happened to float). But I'd
consider it.

This is my view:
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012May/0885.html
I'm mainly concerned about consistency across CSS as we add
more instances of logical vocabulary.

~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 24 May 2012 19:00:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:54 GMT