- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2018 00:48:47 -0700
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
- Cc: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, 'WWW International' <www-international@w3.org>
François and I went through the open issues against css-logical-1 today. There weren't very many, but we closed off some mainly-editorial ones, edited in some outstanding resolutions, and triaged the rest. There are a couple we'd like to run by the WG before requesting publication, as current implementations of certain properties violate both points: 1. flow-relative values compute to themselves https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2821 This was implied by the spec before (the relevant properties computed values were defined “as specified”), but we're making it more explicit by copying that line into the css-logical-1 spec as well. As pointed out in the issue, inherited properties like text-align will break if we didn't do this. 2. flow-relative values reference containing block or element writing mode? https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3013 This is currently defined on a per-property basis. For example, the 'text-align' and 'align-content' properties map 'start' against the element's own writing mode (the CB would make no sense), whereas the 'align-self' and 'float' properties map against the CB's writing mode so that the contents of the element don't affect its positioning. And lastly, we think it's time to drop the backgrounds section, as it's still Experimental sketching and the rest of the spec is in the Revising stage and moving towards CR: 3. https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3028 There are two additional issues that we opened based on past www-style discussion, which are marked in the draft as an open discussion and are looking for feedback: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3029 https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3030 The authoring perspective would be particularly useful on 3029; we weren't able to come up with concrete use cases to guide us one way or the other. (Failing that, we'll probably resolve based on implementation complexity.) Our suggestion is to publish after resolving the first three issues, leaving these two open for discussion. ~fantasai
Received on Saturday, 18 August 2018 07:49:17 UTC