Re: [CSS3] Flexible Flow Module, proposal.

I don't really see the need for a separate flow property.  Why not  
just add new values to display?

dave

On Apr 11, 2009, at 6:35 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:

> David Hyatt wrote:
>> On Apr 11, 2009, at 3:53 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>>>
>>>> 4 The property for deciding how an element lays out its children is
>>>> "display-model". We don't need a new "flow" property for
>>>> that.[CSS3BOX]
>>>
>>> We already sang "Sic transit gloria mundi..." to the 'display- 
>>> model'.
>>> It was integrated with the 'display' long time ago.
>>>
>>> I too think that that was wrong but we are here already.
>> I don't think we are there already.  I personally hate the split of  
>> display into multiple properties, and no browser has implemented it.
>> dave
>> (hyatt@apple.com)
>
> Sorry I meant that we already have the 'display' in its current form
> and I do not think it is even feasible to change it at this point.
>
> That is why the 'flow' proposal is trying to be indifferent to the  
> 'display' as much as possible. So far I see no conflicts with the  
> 'flow'
> and 'display'.
>
>
> And yet, the 'flow' greatly reduces need of display:table and friends.
> I think that in reality display:table can be safely deprecated and  
> replaced by flow:table with the definition that this layout method  
> manages standard (for html) layout of <tr>/<td> elements.
> I mean that if someone needs table alike placement then they can use  
> one of the flow methods leaving <table> strictly for the tabular  
> data representation. So intrinsic style sheet that defines default  
> styles
> of HTML elements may have something like:
> table
> {
>  display:block;
>  flow:table;
> }
> rather than that bunch of artificial display:table-row, cell, etc.
>
>
> -- 
> Andrew Fedoniouk.
>
> http://terrainformatica.com
>

Received on Saturday, 11 April 2009 23:49:17 UTC