W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2013

Re: [css3-text] Feature request: "white-space: ignore"

From: Jon Ronnenberg <jon.ronnenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 12:44:41 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPEZGVtrYxsw1a9WvnDyj-yqMzOPDLJZsBsxWGS3tPTd5KHUfw@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Yes, you're right about flexbox. Although flexbox is far less pragmatic.
Let me elaborate.
## Inline-block
Pro: Is already in use for layouts and is popularized by entities like
Mozilla[1]<https://blog.mozilla.org/webdev/2009/02/20/cross-browser-inline-block/>,
and by a plethora of
bloggers[2]<http://robertnyman.com/2010/02/24/css-display-inline-block-why-it-rocks-and-why-it-sucks/>
[3] <http://www.ternstyle.us/blog/float-vs-inline-block>[4]<http://designshack.net/articles/css/whats-the-deal-with-display-inline-block/>and
is currently the only alternative to floats, which is neither designed
for layouts but for positioning images. If a "discard" value where agreed
upon for "white-space", it should be trivial to design a javascript shim,
that would implement this feature until browser vendors "catch-up" with the
spec. I would be keen to implement such a shim. Inline-block is
currently supported
by almost a 100% of browsers in the wild[5]<http://caniuse.com/inline-block>
.

Con: White space in the HTML is
significant[6]<https://github.com/csswizardry/csswizardry-grids#classes-in-markup>
.

## Flexbox
Pro: Does indeed address this design issue and is getting steadily
increasing support.

Con: Is not general supported and is supported differently across browsers
[7] <http://caniuse.com/flexbox>. No reliable shim is
available[8<http://html5please.com/#flexbox>
][9 <https://github.com/doctyper/flexie#readme>] to "up" browser support.

   1. https://blog.mozilla.org/webdev/2009/02/20/cross-browser-inline-block/
   2.
   http://robertnyman.com/2010/02/24/css-display-inline-block-why-it-rocks-and-why-it-sucks/
   3. http://www.ternstyle.us/blog/float-vs-inline-block
   4.
   http://designshack.net/articles/css/whats-the-deal-with-display-inline-block/
   5. http://caniuse.com/inline-block
   6. https://github.com/csswizardry/csswizardry-grids#classes-in-markup
   7. http://caniuse.com/flexbox
   8. http://html5please.com/#flexbox
   9. https://github.com/doctyper/flexie#readme

It's my hope that we can reach consensus on that the ability to "discard"
white space is a win for everyone and for all web authors, currently and in
the future, regardless that a new and shiny proposal levitate us from the
design issue at hand. I personally, dislike non pragmatic solutions when a
pragmatic ready-to-use now solution exists.

Cheers, Jon


2013/4/19 fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>

> On 04/18/2013 05:23 PM, Jon Ronnenberg wrote:
>
>> Hi guys.
>>
>> I just want to point out that Bert's feature request could help sooth a
>> much bigger issue that we (front end devs) are
>> battling with fluid grid systems. As the discussions at
>> https://github.com/**csswizardry/inuit.css/issues/**194<https://github.com/csswizardry/inuit.css/issues/194>and
>> https://github.com/**csswizardry/inuit.css/issues/**170<https://github.com/csswizardry/inuit.css/issues/170>show.
>>
>> As the CSS3 Text Module <http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-**text/#white-space<http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-text/#white-space>>
>> is still a working draft, would anyone mind that,
>> 'white-space': discard|ignore is written into the draft? There is already
>> a note, ISSUE 3, that states /"There have been
>> requests for the ability to "discard" white space; the current definition
>> has no facility for this."/
>>
>
> As was mentioned earlier in this thread, use Flexbox.
> Inline-blocks were not designed for that kind of layout;
> that's why they don't collapse away the white space.
>   http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-**flexbox/<http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-flexbox/>
>
> ~fantasai
>
>
Received on Friday, 19 April 2013 10:45:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:10 UTC