- From: Joshua Lindquist via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2024 18:26:59 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I think the current syntax is much easier to understand than the proposed alternative. I had to read the alternative explanation multiple times and check the additional context in the other linked comment before I understood. I agree that it might be nice to have one `layout` value instead of six for code simplicity, but I also think it adds confusion because you cannot read the alternative syntax and immediately understand which display mode you are working in. The `reading-order-items` property may not be in the same declaration as the `display` property. Perhaps `display: grid` is declared for all `div.fubar` but we only need to change the reading order on `div.fubar.special`. That extra declaration might be nested or even declared in a different stylesheet. You then have no idea what `layout` and `cross-layout` are doing. Is it grid or flex, rows or columns, etc.? The current value syntax makes it immediately clear which display mode you are in and explicitly tells you what order has been activated. I also prefer how the current value syntax follows the established format of Flex and Grid related features beginning with `flex-` and `grid-` (though, admittedly, the prefixes are normally used for properties rather than values). I see the merit of the alternative, but I strongly prefer the current syntax. -- GitHub Notification of comment by JoshuaLindquist Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9923#issuecomment-1934705384 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 8 February 2024 18:27:01 UTC