- From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
- Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 17:44:23 +1200
- To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Cc: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <11e306600904102244i1efb3535kb3add5cfbaa7a41b@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com > wrote: > Here is our proposal for the new module named Flexible Flow: > > http://www.terrainformatica.com/w3/flex-layout/flex-layout.htm > I quite like it. As well as adding text to make it clear that 'float' does not apply to flow children, you should also mention that 'clear' is not relevant when flow is not 'default' or 'horizontal-flow' or 'vertical-flow'. Actually, one thing I don't like is the way 'flow' mutates a block into something that's really quite different. It would feel better to me if there were new 'display' values, say 'flow' and 'inline-flow', and 'flow' only applies when one of those is set. You wouldn't need 'flow:default'. Regarding naming, the property 'flow:horizontal-flow' uses the word 'flow' in two different ways. Maybe 'horizontal-wrap' would be a better term. You don't explicitly mention the order in which flow children are placed (top to bottom, bottom to top, left to right, right to left). XUL flexboxes let authors control this, and you probably should too, maybe via additional flow values? There seems to be no way to set the width of a flow child to the intrinsic width plus some flex (or a specified width plus some flex). That seems like a big limitation. In some cases you can use flex padding or margins to get the effect, but sometimes you want the element to be able to lay out its children in the extra width. Is there an easy way to fix that? I don't understand this: > All non-bound children of the templated container are appended to the grid as if they span > a single row in it. You haven't said anything about how the template is actually laid out. You introduce the '*' unit without really defining it. This seems like the weakest part of your proposal, does it really need to be integrated here? Rob -- "He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah 53:5-6]
Received on Saturday, 11 April 2009 05:45:01 UTC