- 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