Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-display-4] Do we need `reading-order: <integer>` or should `reading-order: auto` be allowable in all grid or flex layouts? (#8589)

Proposed syntax:

```
reading-order-items: normal | flex [ visual | flow ] | grid [ rows | columns ]
```

`normal` means to use DOM order. `flex` only works on flex containers; it either traverses the rows visually (based on writing modes, so left-to-right or top-to-bottom for English) or per flex-flow. `grid` only works on grid containers, it traverses the grid row-major or column-major.

In either of the latter cases, the 'order' property is taken into account, just like any other flex/grid layout property that affects where the element ends up. So an `order: -1` element sliding to the front of the flexbox will make it first in `flex flow` as well (and possibly in `flex visual`, depending).

(Do we want a "DOM order, but let `order` take effect as well" value? That lets you stick with the "I made a good DOM order, just follow it" behavior of `normal`, but allows small tweaks for layout breakpoints. If so, I propose `from-order`.)

-----

Per issue discussion, the `reading-order` property itself is no longer necessary; since we're dropping the integer value there's only the `auto` value left. We can put it back if we ever need it.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8589#issuecomment-1690278747 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Wednesday, 23 August 2023 16:33:57 UTC