- From: Eduard Pascual <herenvardo@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 17:51:00 +0200
- To: Andrés Sanhueza <peroyomaslists@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style@w3.org
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 4:03 AM, Andrés Sanhueza <peroyomaslists@gmail.com> wrote: > 2010/7/12 Eduard Pascual <herenvardo@gmail.com>: >> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > >> In any case, now I am even more convinced that a request for a CSS >> feature to work-around the mark-up's inability to describe a structure >> is quite a symptom of a flaw on the mark-up language. In other words, >> the use cases should be addressed by HTML through explicit structuring >> elements. > > I agree, but there are cases where it is justified, like if I want to > group several <li> in a list for showing something like a table where > an actual table isn't appropriate (like an image gallery). If I > instead do something like this: > > <ul> > <ligroup> > <li></li> > <li></li> > <li></li> > </ligroup> > <ligroup> > <li></li> > <li></li> > <li></li> > </ligroup> > <ligroup> > <li></li> > <li></li> > </ligroup> > </ul> > > I'm using the grouping element merely for presentational purposes—as > in dividing a row of each one and keeping three columns, so a CSS > workaround is desirable. > Aren't CSS Grid Positioning [1] and display:table-* [2] supposed to address those "looks like a table but is not tabular data" cases? In any case, I'm not against this proposal: I think it's a quite interesting feature that may be solving some current problems but in addition provides a new tool for web artists and designers to squeeze their creativity. I just wanted to highlight how your initial use-case exposed a significant flaw on HTML's design. Regards, Eduard Pascual [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-grid/ [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/CR-CSS2-20090908/tables.html
Received on Friday, 16 July 2010 15:51:49 UTC