- From: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 02:14:41 -0500
- To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
Andrew Fedoniouk wrote: > I am experimenting with Java style layout managers in CSS > and use home grown 'flow' style attribute for defining layout > type. > > So far 'flow' gets following values: > > flow:vertical > - standard layout of <div> element. > > flow:horizontal > - same as above but child blocks layouted > in horizontal direction forming single row; /me coughs in a manner that sounds remarkably like "-moz-box-orient". It also sounds like you can simulate the latter with "display: table-cell" and some creative selectors... > flow:h-flow > - this is close to Java's FlowLayout [1], > blocks layouted horizontally until space > allows consequently forming rows; Couldn't you just style the child elements "display: inline-block"? > flow:v-flow > - this is close to column layout, > blocks layouted from top to bottom. > On vertical overflow they are wrapped into new column; Hmm. Might be able to simulate this with CSS3 multi-column-related properties, but not easily. > Screenshot of h-flow layout is here: > http://terrainformatica.com/w3/h-flow.jpg > > Each "flowed" container declared as: > > <div class="container" > > <div class="sub">#1</div> > <div class="sub">#2</div> > <div class="sub">#3</div> > <div class="sub">#4</div> > <div class="sub">#5</div> > </div> > > Main differences of horizontal flows from > existing methods like display:inline-block or > float: left are: > > 1) margin collapsing between blocks works > in both directions - vertical and horizontal. > ( On screenshot above each child block > has margin:20px set) > 2) all blocks in row having height:auto > (or 100%% in my case) are getting the > same final (computed) height. > > My conclusions: > > These three new schemas: > 1) are simple in use and in implementation; I suppose that would depend on the way the user agent renderer is coded. > 2) due to their simplicity can be implemented > uniformely in different UA's ; Perhaps. Mozilla already implements half of it. > 3) can effectively eliminate need of tables for > layout purposes in typical cases. Why not just use CSS-based table layout? It's not like Microsoft's going to support your new CSS properties before it supports CSS 2.1... I wouldn't mind seeing seeing a "box-orient" property. The other two flow styles are debatable. Hmm...
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2005 07:15:00 UTC