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

Re: [css-display] Unofficial draft of a Display spec ready for consumption

From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 14:55:40 -0700
Message-ID: <CALRQH7-vOp=rNbdk5CMu1OhHp7YmUM4h0CzOmfqNeMfS+rNOXQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey all!  I've been complaining for some time about the fact that
> 'display' unnecessarily conflates "layout mode" with "role in parent's
> layout mode".

> As such, I've written up a first draft of a proposal to split
> 'display' into sub-properties:
> <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-display-3/>.  (It currently has the ED
> styling, but as I've indicated in the Status section, it's technically
> an Unofficial Draft until the WG approves it.)

'display-box'  either 'normal' or 'none'
sounds misleading for inline elements. They have no box to hide or to
show normally.

We already have 'visibility' property so why do we need more?
We just need to add new value like visibility:excluded to define
display:none effect.

And it is good to hear that you finally started to speak about
"layout mode" (layout method, layout manager, etc. in classic UI sense).

But I am not sure I understand how your split will be backward compatible.
Something tells me that it is not.

If it is interesting then this is how I am handling my 'flow' property with
respect of the 'display':

if  display:inline and flow:{non-default} -> display:inline-block /
if  display:inline-block and flow:{non-default} ->
display:inline-block / flow:{as-defined}
if  display:block and flow:{any} -> display:block / flow:{as-defined}
if  display:table and flow:{any}  -> display:block / flow:table
if  display:inline-table -> display:inline-block / flow:table
if  display:table-cell,etc. -> display:table-cell,etc, flow is ignored

These are rules used to get computed values of 'display' and 'flow'
( display-inside in your interpretation).

In my case the 'flow' have 'default' value that gets computed to either 'text'
(text containers like <p> if no display:block elements inside) or
to 'blocks' - standard blocks flow (e.g. like <li>'s in <ul>).

This way the 'flow' is backward compatible with existing 'display' and
the 'display'
doesn't need to be changed at all.

Andrew Fedoniouk.

Received on Saturday, 20 October 2012 21:56:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:04 UTC