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

Re: [css-grid] Punt subgrids to level 2?

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 23:10:59 -0800
Message-ID: <53157C83.4020506@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 03/03/2014 11:29 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 12:45 PM, fantasai
> <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
>> On 02/03/2014 06:20 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>> I know it's currently at-risk, but I don't feel like that section of
>>> the spec will be CR-ready before Chrome and IE are ready to ship
>>> implementations of the rest of the spec publicly.  We should go ahead
>>> and punt it now, rather than pretending that it'll stay through to CR
>>> or delaying the CR of the spec due to this.
>> That would be equivalent to shipping Regions with only element-based
>> region containers. The reason many people in the WG are against that
>> is because it encourages bad markup design. Shipping grid without
>> subgrid also encourages bad markup design. Worse, in fact, because it
>> requires *stripping* markup that otherwise would be there, not just
>> adding in a few extraneous empty elements.
>> So I find this proposal problematic and I find your logic inconsistent.
> I'm not sure what's inconsistent about it; could you elaborate?
> It is slightly problematic - you know that I agree with you that
> subgrids are a valuable feature.  But what's more valuable than
> subgrids is *making Grid usable at all*, and implementations are ready
> to go right now.  Grid is extremely valuable, and I don't think it
> should be delayed any further for features that are valuable but not
> required for an initial implementation.  *Most* use-cases of Grid,
> including the major one of overall page layout, are fine without
> subgrid, and shouldn't be delayed.

That's exactly the argument for shipping Regions without a mechanism
to create a template other than by inserting elements into the document.

It is consistent to both:
   - advocate shipping Regions with only elements-as-regions abilities
   - advocate shipping Grid without subgrids
   - advocate not shipping Regions until something other than
     elements-as-regions is usable (regardless of whether said thing
     replaces or supplements elements-as-regions, just is usable)
   - advocate shipping Grid together with subgrids
but not
   - advocate not shipping Regions until something other than
     elements-as-regions is usable with it
   - advocate shipping Grid without subgrids

But maybe fall under the first category, in which case you're being
consistent, and just don't agree with you. ^_^

Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2014 07:11:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:19 UTC