[csswg-drafts] [css-logical] flow-relative ordering

jonathantneal has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts:

== [css-logical] flow-relative ordering ==
>From directly above and including https://drafts.csswg.org/css-logical/#example-368bde23

> If four values are set, they apply to the block-start, inline-start, block-end, and inline-end sides in that order.

```css
blockquote {
  margin: logical 1em 2em 3em 4em;
}
blockquote {
  margin-block-start:  1em;
  margin-inline-start: 2em;
  margin-block-end:    3em;
  margin-inline-end:   4em;
}
```

This ordering seems illogical, especially if the block-first wasn’t logical enough that it would be reconsidered, as opposed to merely swapping out top/right/bottom/left for bs/ie/be/is.

In existing web technology, graphic design, or plotting, the ordering is usually inline (width, X) before block (height, Y). This is found in most forms of printing or plotting design, 2D graphic applications like Photoshop or Gimp, 3D graphic applications Blender or Maya, existing web technology measurements like screen resolutions or DOM / Canvas / SVG offset coordinates. It’s colloquialism likely stems from the 14th century [Cartesian coordinate system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartesian_coordinate_system).

If my “six centuries standard” claim is not too bold, I would recommend the ordering be updated to place inline (width, X) first before block (height, Y), preserving start before end, and then continuing in that clockwise direction:

```css
blockquote {
  margin: logical 1em 2em 3em 4em;
}
blockquote {
  margin-inline-start: 1em;
  margin-block-start:  2em;
  margin-inline-end:   3em;
  margin-block-end:    4em;
}
```

Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1500 using your GitHub account

Received on Monday, 5 June 2017 13:46:17 UTC