Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-display-4] Initial value of `reading-flow` (#11396)

* We're not particularly attached to the current names; happy to accept other suggestions. However, our suggestion of `none` is to emphasize that *no* special behavior occurs - you explicitly get none of the side effects and nothing works, explicitly opting out of the default behavior. We just want to make sure that remains clear with whatever name we choose.
* It sounds like you're suggesting a new, currently unspecified reading-flow behavior? If we want that, we should work on it more explicitly; we shouldn't bodge it in too quickly as the new default behavior without working out details.

    Of course, the way to avoid any issues with unexpected reorderings (particularly if authors are currently doing exactly what the spec tells them to, and making sure the source order is meaningful) is to... do nothing by default, aka the current state of things. We're okay with doing nothing (we definitely agree there can be web-compat issues, which is why we've done some use counters and aren't comfortable with doing non-dense grids), we've just been trying to address y'all's feedback that we *should* have some default behavior.

    So, if "don't have default behavior" is acceptable, that avoids a lot of issues, and we think that would be preferable.
* We have gathered a lot of examples, many/most of which are described in [the original issue](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7387). More examples are always good, of course.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11396#issuecomment-2701580242 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2025 17:15:56 UTC