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

Re: [css-grid][css-align] Issues with align-content / justify-content properties

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2014 08:10:56 -0500
Message-ID: <545CC4E0.3060408@inkedblade.net>
To: Javier Fernandez <jfernandez@igalia.com>, www-style@w3.org
On 11/05/2014 04:47 PM, Javier Fernandez wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm working on the implementation of the align-content and
> justify-content properties for grid and it seems ISSUE6 is still
> pending; I've already made some assumptions for the ongoing
> implementation but it'd be great to solve it as soon as possible.
>   - http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-align-3/#issue-dda0e769

Issue 6 is just a terminology issue wrt "bounds of the grid".
Probably not the issue you're concerned about.

> I'm assuming 2 different interpretations depending on the kind if value
> used for the alignment.
>    - in case of <content-position> values, the 'alignment.container' is
> the grid container and the 'alignment subject' is the box defined by the
> grid tracks
>    - in case of <content-distribution>,the 'alignment container' is the
> grid track, while the grid items placed on it are the 'alignment subject' .
> I'm not sure how to deal with items placed on the same Gird Cell or
> occupying more than one row/column track when using content-distribution
> values.

Actually, I don't think what you wrote (point #2) makes sense...

We hadn't strongly considered the interpretation of the <content-distribution>
values for Grid; I think the original thought was to keep the entire grid
as a single unit, so they'd all fall back to their fallback alignment.

However, we did get some feedback on people wanting to stretch out
the grid by spacing apart the tracks:
So, ideally, we would do that for the <content-distribution> values.
(It would have some interesting interactions with the sizing of spanning
grid items, though, and we haven't quite worked out the implications.)

> It's also not clear to me which are the cases where content-distribution
> values should fall-back to the corresponding content-position value.

Currently, I'd go with "always", unless we figure out justification of
grid tracks.

> Shouldn't these particular cases be described in the Grid spec ?


Received on Friday, 7 November 2014 13:11:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:26 UTC