- From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 19:24:06 +0200
- To: Ben Ward <benmward@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Ben Ward wrote: > On 05/10/05, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org> wrote: >>And an idea I briefly alluded to before: >>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2005Mar/0058 >> >>The latter hasn't been fully published yet, but an example would be like >>this: > > I recall reading through that a few months ago and I quite liked it. I > think 'ASCII-art' is imperfect (being limited to 26 regions isn't so > big an issue, but being unable to apply 'friendly' names to your grid > regions is a problem for me. It needn't be limited to 26 -- you've got the whole of Unicode to pick from :) I agree friendly names would be more usable (if more verbose), but that's a small syntactical issue, there's no difference in the model if you adopt the following syntax: grid: "myGrid" " foo | foo | bar ", " foo | glork | ook "; and then reference the names (I've also given the grid itself a name so that it may be referenced elsewhere). Note that I have "foo" be a complete corner just for kicks -- I'm unsure that should be allowed. > For me personally though, the biggest issue remains vertical styling. > The ability to equalise the height of two elements based on the > content of the largest element remains the biggest layout issue. > Solving that through any means would probably satisfy most of the > requirements for a new layout model. That can be solved orthogonally to the way in which the grid is specified in the first place. -- Robin Berjon Senior Research Scientist Expway, http://expway.com/
Received on Wednesday, 5 October 2005 17:24:23 UTC