- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2024 23:50:06 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I definitely think this is a problem to solve, but I hate all the presented options. ^_^ 1. Virtual scrolling is confusing; a portion of the scrollbar doesn't cause any motion. 2. *Real* bonus scrolling is awful-looking in demos like this, where there's a large distance between the ideal center and the 0 scroll position. (Especially on my widescreen monitor, phew.) 3. Proportional redistribution screws up the entire range. Just *clearly* wrong in practice, as only 8 and 9 actually register themselves when snapped. 4. Just redistributing up to the next point has unpredictable effects, since the distance to the next exact snap point might be very small (maybe even zero). But when the distance is reasonably-sized, this does look okay, and it's correct for all of the range that *is* alignable. 5. The "redistribute up to half a page" seems to *also* misalign the entire range; the alignable items 4-8 register as something below their actual number, while 9-13 all register as something above their actual number. *Nothing* is correctly aligned. But I suppose if there were even more items they'd eventually align? So I think a more subtle take on 5 would be fine; rather than half a page, perhaps just the next alignable snap point at least some fixed predetermined distance away. We could also apply this non-linearly (a cubic ramp?) so it still spends most of its time selecting the items near the alignable point, rather than ones close to the start, looking *mostly* correct while still visiting all the items as you scroll. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11165#issuecomment-2463445387 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 7 November 2024 23:50:07 UTC