- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 23:09:21 -0700
- To: <www-style@w3.org>
There is a number of discussions on the list that have one common area: 1) flexbox - XUL version and its reincarnation in Mr. Atkins proposal. It is about different types of block flow. 2) The "template" proposal - "free range" block flow. 3) The Grid proposal - kind of template block flow. 4) The Text Layout Module [1] introduces literally 'block-flow'. As you see all these proposals/modules are trying to define various types of block-flow in CSS. They compete for single entity - value of some 'flow' or 'block-flow' CSS property. 'block-flow' in [1] defines "Top-to-bottom block flow", "left-to-right block flow", etc. The flexbox proposal is trying to define exactly the same entities. The "template" [2] is also about block flows. When applied "template" will be mutually exclusive with the 'block-flow' and with flexbox. I propose to unify all this in single 'block-flow' property that will contain definition of layout method of blocks inside block-container: block-flow: vertical | horizontal | vertical-box | horizontal-box | "template" | grid | ... with 'vertical' being a default value. Existing 'direction' property already defines writing method - ltr and rtl and can be used for the definition of block flow direction. For vertical writing systems the 'direction' can be extended by the values 'ttb-rtl' and 'ttb-ltr'. (In fact full form of current 'ltr' is 'ltr-ttb') I see a great value for e.g. **-box and "template" layouts for Japanese, Chinese and Korean pages - they use tables a lot at the moment. Flex units, block-flows and templates when done are significantly better than tables for layout purposes. [1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-text-layout [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-layout/ -- Andrew Fedoniouk Terra Informatica Software, Inc. http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Tuesday, 8 June 2010 06:16:31 UTC