[Bug 22772] width, height, top, left attributes or properties that always work

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22772

--- Comment #14 from Jim Michaels <jmichae3@yahoo.com> ---
flex talks about building layouts in 2 dimensions, I want to do it in 3
dimensions. that's what z-index is for isn't it?

there isn't much css support for box models & such in that 3rd dimension. it's
kind of an orphan.

I tried http://jesusnjim.com/test/css-flex.html based on examples from the
spec.
but it didn't do anything different than if I were to leave off the z-index.
to get that to work like the use case, I would somehow have to be able to make
elements relative to another without having to specify positions. am I missing
something?

maybe you can show me an example that can get me thinking in the right
direction.
 the flex spec I am having a bit of a time trying to be able to apply. I don't
100% understand it yet based on what I have read the abtract is clear enough,
but I would not know how to make code and make code do what I want it to with
flex. grid says it's 2D layout for GUIs, once again I am stuck with no way to
relatively position my element. tried position:relative and position:absolute
but they are not doing it, but getting close with those, but still no way to
address elements in css - I gotta put my thinking cap on some more.

storm here, I gotta shutdown

having a feature like what I was wanting could make better web apps for online
photo and text/object editing and such I would think. usually people want to
move objects forward and backward, bring to top and send to bottom, etc. better
layers support would enable this sort of thing, provided people didn't have to
absolute address everything on the page (that's hard). there's an additional
use I just though of. the idea of being able to layer elements effectively
could be very useful for web apps. especially since you can specify opacity and
such things (now for masks... maybe I am getting into another bug report with
masks... but it's a very useful idea, not sure if it's easily implementable
though).




shackling is a term coined by the o'reilly css cookbook.
http://my.safaribooksonline.com/book/web-development/css/9781449377250/css-basics/using_shackling_positioning

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2013 06:49:21 UTC