Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-overflow-3] 'overflow' 2-value syntax is in wrong order

The Working Group just discussed `'overflow' 2-value syntax is in wrong order`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: Match the block followed by inline ordering of 2 value pairs for the overflow-x and overflow-y shorthand to be consistent`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic: 'overflow' 2-value syntax is in wrong order<br>
&lt;dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2988<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: This is value ordering and we try to do x then y, but all logical properties are block and then inline. What is the proposal here?<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Proposal is to use the logical order, block then inline. Overflow prop do have logicial shorthands. Also pretty important to make sure ordering matches with scroll-snap-align. Having them opposite is fairly confusing<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: This would apply to...a handful or properties<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Just overflow shorthand property. I don't know of any others, though they might exist<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Do we keep consistency for position properties?<br>
&lt;dbaron> how many engines implement 2-value overflow?  Gecko does.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Once in logical coord are block first inline second. All the 4 values are block first inline second<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Logicial 2 value coord is mainly background-position and that's a rough WD with logical positioning values<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Physical are x then y<br>
&lt;dael> dbaron: How many engines impl?<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Just mozilla b/c we jsut added in April<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: We've had overflow-x and -y since IE 6<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: We won't change that.<br>
&lt;bradk> When did we resolve on doing block first? That seems wrong to me.<br>
&lt;rego> Chromium has it in M68 I believe<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Sorry, though you were talking about long hand<br>
&lt;rego> https://www.chromestatus.com/feature/5090725653905408<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: So that means compat risk is fairly small<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Yeah<br>
&lt;fantasai> bradk, awhile back ... when we were working on css-grid<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: dbaron would you guys be okay with this?<br>
&lt;dael> dbaron: Yeah<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Prop: Match the block followed by inline ordering of 2 value pairs for the overflow-x and overflow-y shorthand to be consistent<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Objections?<br>
&lt;fantasai> bradk, I'm not entirely convinced it was a good idea, there were good arguments in both directions... but we should be consistent here<br>
&lt;dael> RESOLVED: Match the block followed by inline ordering of 2 value pairs for the overflow-x and overflow-y shorthand to be consistent<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2988#issuecomment-411470526 using your GitHub account

Received on Wednesday, 8 August 2018 16:34:45 UTC