W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2014

Re: overflow: repeat – Repeating Content for CSS

From: Brian Blakely <anewpage.media@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 10:55:05 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJGQg4GAvqj3UbhJ3Lj3=52x7CGb7svP2fL1O5LvFTj8xTAJrw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, Jacob Rossi <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>
Hi Rick,

> it should be possible to build such an effect on top of some primitives that are lower-level

As in, a DOM/JS API, or less sugared CSS?



On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Brian Blakely <anewpage.media@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Recently went over the awesome minutes taken from the recent Web Input
>> Brainstorming session
>> (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Bfcw9iR1SF2VYCXBegbqhbqWMim-ZEd7_iaQODE-RPY/edit).
>
>
> Thanks, I'm glad they were useful to you!
>
>> The topic of "Carouseling scrollers" came up ("Scroll Response APIs"
>> segment) and I thought this proposal was worth resurfacing, as carouseling
>> is one of the primary use cases.
>
>
> In the discussion I think we were mainly focused on scrollers with a defined
> start and end-point (there was confusion on the 'carousel' term here - with
> Google folks using it to refer to any image scroller that snaps at image
> boundaries, and others using it to apply only to those with wrap-around
> behavior).  But we did agree that the web should offer some good solution
> for the wrap-around case.
>
> I think the blink team position would probably be that it should be possible
> to build such an effect on top of some primitives that are lower-level than
> overflow: repeat.  Eg. we all agreed that it's really important to nail the
> infinite scroller use cases (like facebook etc.).  Once you've done that, a
> circular scroller should really just be a special case.
>
>>
>> Original proposal post:
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Aug/0564.html
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Brian Blakely <anewpage.media@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 3:12 AM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It might get a bit tricky if you have a fixed height (or width for
>>>> repeat-x) and the content fits one and a half time in it. But I suppose the
>>>> scroll bar would scroll twice the normal content dimension then.
>>>>
>>>> I think it is a good idea as well.
>>>>
>>>> Greetings,
>>>> Dirk
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Dirk,
>>>
>>> Not sure I completely understand the nature of this caveat, but I'll
>>> describe the scenario that I think you're envisioning and how it might work:
>>>
>>> 1. Repeating content's nominal height is 150px
>>> 2. Overflow container's height is 100px
>>> 3. User scrolls 150px down
>>> 4. Scrollbar indicator is now at the bottom of the the overflow container
>>> 5. User scrolls an additional 1px
>>> 6. Scrollbar indicator is now at the top of the overflow container
>>> 7. The first row of pixels for the repeating content are now visible at
>>> the bottom of the overflow container
>>
>>
>
Received on Tuesday, 8 July 2014 14:55:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:23 UTC