- From: fantasai via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 01 May 2018 00:48:00 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
@mrego I'm not following. We use 200px height to calculate the intrinsic width of the orthogonal item, sure. And then we start the track sizing algorithm, sizing the columns based on that information. Whether we perform alignment of the tracks after that set of tracks is sized or at the end of the algorithm, the final size of the orthogonal item will still be 300px or 500px. If we apply alignment within the grid algorithm, it seems to me we get a better result regardless, no? The proposal, if I understand correctly (just so we're all clear) is to change from: 1. Size the columns, making some estimates about row sizes (if needed for orthogonal flows) 2. Size the rows, using the column sizes we just calculated (if needed for orthogonal flows) 3. Size the column, using the row sizes we just calculated (skip if not needed) 4. Size the rows, using the column sizes we just calculated (skip if not needed) 5. Align the tracks to: 1. Size the columns, making some estimates about row sizes (if needed for orthogonal flows). Align the columns (so colspans in the next step are more accurate). 2. Size the rows, using the column sizes we just calculated (if needed for orthogonal flows). Align the rows (so rowspans in the next step are more accurate). 3. Size the column, using the row sizes we just calculated (skip if not needed). Align the rows (so colspans in the next step are more accurate). 4. Size the rows, using the column sizes we just calculated (skip if not needed). Align the rows. -- GitHub Notification of comment by fantasai Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2557#issuecomment-385571268 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2018 00:48:42 UTC