Re: Proposal for non-normative example section (Was: RE: How is it possible to devise such a feeble system?)

On Wednesday 24 October 2001 22:21, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote:
|   > -----Original Message-----
|   > From: Bjoern Hoehrmann [mailto:derhoermi@gmx.net]
|   > Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 3:49 PM
|   >
|   > * Jeffrey Yasskin wrote:
|   > >So nobody really understands the spec, even on this list.
|   >
|   > *Please*, ask questions and propose clarifications if you
|   > think something is not clear enough. Optimization for human
|   > consumption is something the writer can hardly do without
|   > reader input.
|
|   Judging from the discussion here, people don't fully understand how the
|   spec deals with centering elements and the size of the top-level
|   element. "margin:auto" is non-intuitive, and it behaving differently
|   horizontally and vertically is downright confusing. Even though this
|   fact is plainly evident from the box module.
|
|   > >How much less likely is it that a beginning developer will
|   >
|   > understand
|   >
|   > >it?
|   >
|   > Specifications aren't generally written for users or authors
|   > in this case. Someone who doesn't know how non-Latin writing
|   > systems work or who isn't familiar with common typography is
|   > likely to be confused by some parts of CSS Level 3,
|   > optimizing for them is not feasable. Developers should refer
|   > to secondary materials like tutorials, books, guides,
|   > whatever if they want to learn CSS, specifications cannot
|   > teach authors to use technologies described therin, at least
|   > not beyond a certain level of verbosity.
|
|   This is true. The text module is far beyond me. But the box module is
|   used by everyone, while the confusing parts of the text module are only
|   used by the people who need it. Therefore, the box module needs to be
|   more accessible to the general reader.
|
|   > >There should be a non-normative section of CSS3 (and CSS2.1) giving
|   > >techniques for table-less layouts.
|   >
|   > Go, write it, publish it, I and others will happily link to
|   > it. Why should that be part of a specification?
|
|   The spec declares that table-based layouts are a bad thing, but it
|   doesn't give an alternative. And, in fact, the alternative in CSS2 is
|   difficult to write. There do exist such websites, in particular A List
|   Apart <http://www.alistapart.com/stories/journey/>, but these sites are
|   hard to find, and half of them are inaccurate.
|
|   > >Two important cases are: the one
|   > >discussed here, centering stuff vertically and horizontally;
|   >
|   > and 2- and
|   >
|   > >3-column-based layouts.
|   >
|   > Why is reading the column module text not sufficient to learn
|   > how to setup column based layout? I think there was only one
|   > feedback thread on the column module on this list.
|
|   I like that spec, but it's not the kind of columns I was talking about.
|   I was referring to the type of layout at Mozilla
|   <http://www.mozilla.org/>, where there's a menu-column on the left, and
|   a separate body section. Similar layouts are all over the web, and
|   they're almost all done with tables because, with CSS, it's just hard to
|   do it.
|
|   > >Then the editors of CSS will be able to see whether CSS is a
|   >
|   > feasible
|   >
|   > >replacement for tables. If CSS requires much more code or
|   > >harder-to-read code than a table-based layout, CSS needs to be
|   > >reconsidered.
|   >
|   > Help thinking, try it yourself, share your results.
|
|   Oh no, I have to think! I'm pretty sure that the CSS is more code, but
|   obviously I can't prove that without writing several pairs of pages.
|   Whenever I get around to that I'll post the results to here.
|
|   On the assumption that the current CSS is more code, and to clear up the
|   evident confusion about positioning within blocks, I'll propose a new
|   property valid on block-level elements:
|
|   Name: 'align' (or Vadim's 'block-align')
|   Value: [ [<percentage> | <length> ]{1,2} | [ [top | center | bottom] ||
|   [left | center | right] ] ] | inherit
|   Initial:  0% 0%
|   Applies to:  block-level (and replaced elements ?)
|   Inherited:  no
|   Percentages: refer to the size of the containing block
|
|   See <http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-css3-background-20010924/#properties4>
|   for a description of the meanings of the values.
|
|   To make a three-column layout, one would type:
|

well, I can suggest following code will format text exactly as you want.
(I added border to left and right part, to make example more visual)

Anyway, I like your proposal, and would be happy to hear comments on it from 
CSS2 editors. 
Note that Mozilla, for some reason, can't render it correctly, so I attach 
screenshot from Konqueror.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<html>
  <head>
    <style>
#left   {float:left;
	width: 15%;
	height: 100%;
	border: 1px solid lime}
#misc   {
	width: 70%;
	height: 100%;
}
#right  {float:right;
	width: 15%;
	height: 100%;
	border: 1px solid orange}
    </style>
  </head>
  <body>
    <div id="right">
      Ads go here, filling the right side of the page, and loading
first.
    </div>
    <div id="left">
      Menu goes here, filling the left side of the page.
    </div>
    <div id="misc">
      Content goes here, filling the center of the page, and loading
last.
    </div>
  </body>
</html>

[...]
|
|   I can see the percentage property being confusing because, "With a value
|   pair of '14% 84%', the point 14% across and 84% down the [block] is to
|   be placed at the point 14% across and 84% down the [containing block]."
|   Figuring out how this interacts with width and height could be
|   confusing, but I don't think it's a huge problem as long as you stick to
|   the keywords.
|
|   Jeffrey Yasskin

-- 

Vadim Plessky
http://kde2.newmail.ru  (English)
33 Window Decorations and 6 Widget Styles for KDE
http://kde2.newmail.ru/kde_themes.html
KDE mini-Themes
http://kde2.newmail.ru/themes/

Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2001 19:28:36 UTC