W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > July 2018

Re: [csswg-drafts] [cssom-view] Doubts regarding the overflow directions description

From: L. David Baron via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:49:20 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-405773581-1531874958-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
So I think the [definition of inline base direction](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-writing-modes-4/#inline-base-direction) is defining it as a physical direction (could be any one of the four directions), and the [definitions of the values of the `direction` property](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-writing-modes-4/#propdef-direction) map `ltr` and `rtl` to being "line-left to line-right" and "line-right to line-left".  This makes the draft quite confusing when it uses only "left to right" and "right to left" (which may make more sense if you look at the [Abstract to Physical Mapping table](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-writing-modes-4/#logical-to-physical)).

It seems like, if my interpretetation of writing-modes is correct, then the spec could just simplify things and say that the two overflow directions are in the direction of the block flow direction and the inline flow direction.  Alternatively, it could say that they are in the `block-end` and `inline-end` directions.  I think either of those simpler definitions would be clearer than what the spec says today.

But cc @fantasai in case she has a different opinion about how the writing-modes terms should be used.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by dbaron
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1569#issuecomment-405773581 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2018 00:49:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 18 July 2018 00:49:31 UTC