- From: Coby Tamayo via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2025 08:02:59 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I like `flow-tolerance` as well, or `masonry-tolerance`. `order-tolerance` and `pack-tolerance` are both okay, but don't describe what's actually happening as precisely IMHO. Flow in this context already means the flow of content along the width/height of the document, modulo any obstacles. The obstacles in this case just happen to be slightly longer items. So "flow tolerance" to me suggests a maximum tolerance for deviating from what the flow algorithm would strictly do otherwise, which is exactly what we want. I think `masonry-tolerance` works for the same reason, but isn't quite as obvious. "Order" suggests something similar but could also suggest the opposite: how tolerant to be of placing items _out_ of order due to some hypothetical factor, which is confusing to me. And any item can "fit" in any lane, so I think this doesn't clarify what we're tolerating. "Pack" is a little closer but also seems pretty similar to fit. I think `flow-margin` muddies the waters. It obscures the tolerance concept, which is really what we're after. And what we're tolerating isn't an item's margin, it's the _adjustment_ to that margin, i.e. how much we can adjust the margin to achieve a smoother flow. And margin is already overloading an existing term, so I find it extra confusing. I would expect something with `margin` in the name to apply consistently to each item, but instead what the property is describing is, in a sense, how inconsistent we can be. -- GitHub Notification of comment by acobster Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10884#issuecomment-3678572248 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Sunday, 21 December 2025 08:03:00 UTC