- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 00:42:24 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `Alternative masonry path forward`. <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <khush> rachelandrew summarize the feedback. we've got 2 versions in terms of feature parity they are the same<br> <khush> the syntax is different<br> <khush> taken it to 2 devs<br> <khush> after the initial post from webkit, we got feedback<br> <khush> there's no way that devs will get all features showed in the post if we go with separate syntax<br> <khush> went through all the comments and looked at how many of them said display:grid because that's the only way to get features<br> <fantasai> I think that's not quite correct, just that the state of the opposite proposal was to intentionally exclude some of the grid-integrated features.<br> <fantasai> at the time of that post<br> <khush> other feeedback is, is masonry grid or not.<br> <khush> as a teacher of CSS it matters how people think<br> <khush> there is noo consensus there<br> <khush> the other response, which approach is easier to teach and understand<br> <khush> that's the core issue, what is easier for devs to understand<br> <khush> that post is really hard to write<br> <khush> because it's complicated. display masonry has much simpler syntax. display grid requires changing other values<br> <khush> it's just hard. i'll have a hard time explaining it to people<br> <khush> the response to the second post has supported masonry<br> <khush> me and chrome team prefer display: masonry for ergonomics<br> <khush> the other point is future proofing<br> <khush> there are enough things in display grid which are weird<br> <khush> we will have to work around by saying they only work in masonry<br> <oriol> +1 to display:masonry<br> <astearns> ack fantasai<br> <khush> fantasai: i intentionally did not add it to the agenda. too early for this debate<br> <khush> underlying layout model is the same<br> <TabAtkins> q+<br> <khush> only syntax is up for debate<br> <khush> we only published it end of last week<br> <TabAtkins> (it's not just a syntax issue, there is still some behavior differences)<br> <khush> chrome madde the blog post last thursday<br> <TabAtkins> (and they're unresolvable imo)<br> <khush> we should continue to work on issues<br> <khush> impl is not blocked<br> <khush> i want to collect author feedback and think through the syntax<br> <khush> get input from TAG<br> <khush> too soon to start debating syntax<br> <khush> Won't go into my opinion on the syntax<br> <khush> the state of the draft which outlines the 2 syntax and have same functionality<br> <khush> there's pros/cons to each syntax. one is definitely not better<br> <khush> has to come from the context where the syntax is being used and rest of CSS<br> <khush> let's not argue it here right now<br> <astearns> ack TabAtkins<br> <khush> TabAtkins: the difference between integration into grid vs masonry is not just syntax.<br> <khush> diff initial values for properties<br> <khush> display: masonry gets you better values right away<br> <khush> masonry can do auto repeat of instrinsic size tracks<br> <khush> that is not even possible with grid<br> <khush> fantasai: those are separate issues<br> <khush> TabAtkins : it's incorrect to say it's only syntax. behaviour is different<br> <khush> i'm fine with deferring<br> <khush> TabAtkins: it's pretty clear that a bunch of common cases are indeed simpler with the display: masonry syntax.<br> <khush> want to see similar examples with grid.<br> <rachelandrew> Chrome post https://developer.chrome.com/blog/masonry-syntax<br> <khush> let's have those examples when this discussion happens<br> <keithamus> q+<br> <khush> keithamus: display: masonry is a inside display: grid<br> <khush> i can't see any examples for inline masonry<br> <khush> TabAtkins assume inline-masonry exists.<br> <khush> astearns please file an issue for this<br> <khush> fantasai: one argument for grid syntax is we don't have props which only apply to specific context<br> <khush> it's better to go with more examples/input before debating<br> <TabAtkins> I think we actually don't have *any* such properties here. Every property is *at least slightly* different in its syntax.<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9041#issuecomment-2378188639 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 27 September 2024 00:42:25 UTC