Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] CSS Masonry Layout (Issue #1003)

This comment is just from me, without having consulted the rest of the TAG yet.

I see that we have a [compelling description of the use case](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-grid-3/#background) (Yay for solving this problem!) and a [pair](https://webkit.org/blog/15269/help-us-invent-masonry-layouts-for-css-grid-level-3/) of [documents](https://developer.chrome.com/blog/masonry-syntax) advocating for the alternative syntaxes. It's not clear whether both sides agree with the claims in each document and just weigh them differently, or also disagree about some of the factual claims. I'm not confident that the TAG will know enough about the design space to figure out what facts are true, although we may be able to help weigh tradeoffs.

Would it be possible for the two sides to get together and produce a consensus document that describes the disagreement and points out the different values that the TAG should be weighing?

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1003#issuecomment-2412461574
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1003/2412461574@github.com>