Re: [css3-flexbox] Proposal for collapsing box elements depending on containing box size

Pierre d'Herbemont wrote a long and interesting proposal. Rather than  
repeat it, please see the grandparent of this message.

On Jul 31, 2009, at 6:31 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> I like it.   Two comments:
>
> 1. I would prefer a keyword to indicate that a box isn't collapsible,
> rather than hijacking the value 0 for that.  It doesn't make sense
> that 1 collapses before 2, but 0 never collapses at all.  As all
> elements are non-collapsible by default, just having "auto" be the
> non-collapse value will work.
> ~TJ
>

If I understand (and I'm not sure that I do) this proposal extends  
box-flex so that some boxes can 'collapse' and disappear. I would  
prefer to see controls on the box-flex so it is better integrated  
into the flex concepts.

For example, boxes could:

1. expand and shrink with the flex;
2. expand only, never shrinking below 'min';
3. shrink only, never expanding beyond 'max';
4. maintain their sizes, but 'collapse' completely when they don't  
fit (I hope I understood the original correctly);
5. expand and shrink with the flex, but 'collapse' when space is  
limited.

Additionally, boxes might (should) indicate missing material. As text  
uses an ellipsis (...) when some characters / words do not fit on a  
screen and do not overflow, something similar for 'collapsed' or  
'missing' boxes or other elements could be very useful.

Keywords and values (akin to the 'flex' values) could indicate the  
amount of 'flex' both for expansion and shrinking, and collapse.

This is an interesting idea, but it does not seem quite coherent -- yet.

</James>

Received on Friday, 31 July 2009 18:15:35 UTC