- From: Mats Palmgren via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 21:50:02 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
It might seem intuitive that subgrid gaps should trump the parent grid gaps in the example above, but I suspect that's mostly because the parent grid has identically styled subgrids in those rows. In the general case you might have plain items too, and subgrids with different grid-gap values, and subgrids that only partly span the same tracks, and nested subgrids etc. Then it becomes a lot less clear what would be an intuitive gap. As a simple example, why should the subgrid's `grid-row-gap:0` squash the gaps between the outer items here?: ![rachel_andrew_subgrid_example-outer-items](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/4010828/39098585-4c73bbfa-466d-11e8-9e39-5d4e356c2b15.png) It seems to me there might be cases where you'd want them intact, but still have zero gaps in the subgrid (as shown). It might be possible to implement some "gap negotiation" step in the TSA, to take subgrid gaps into account, but this complicates implementations somewhat because they would have to support non-uniform gap values internally. In that case, I'd suggest adding a new opt-in syntax for these "soft" negotiated values to enable a subgrid to still be able to trump the parent gaps locally without propagating that value upwards (and similarly for the parent: to ignore any values from subgrid descendants). Something like `minmax(min-value[, max-value])` perhaps? -- GitHub Notification of comment by MatsPalmgren Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2285#issuecomment-383415107 using your GitHub account
Received on Sunday, 22 April 2018 21:50:07 UTC