- From: Shelby Moore <shelby@coolpage.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:52:12 -0400
- To: "Håkon Wium Lie" <howcome@opera.com>
- Cc: "Alex Mogilevsky" <alexmog@microsoft.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Håkon Wium Lie wrote: > Also sprach Alex Mogilevsky: > > > I think it is > > > > (D) > > foo | foo | foo | bar > > baz > > qux > > > > (as in your option A, but "qux" should be in the first column) > > We agree on the model, I believe. Are you ok with specifying this > behaviour in css3-multicol? I read the whole discussion, and I am leaning towards I don't agree with any of it. :D Just because we are unwilling to span the columns that precede an element, we are causing ugly results that have near 0 semantic correlation (more like aliasing noise) to what the designer intended. One thing I avoid to do is design something in parts, that requires it be designed as a whole and correctly from the beginning. Sometimes we need to not take shortcuts to rush out implementation. 'foo' is really per Håkon's original example, a set of words and thus spannable. So in my and I think the designer's mind, the correct result is: Inline overflow: baz-----------------------> foo | foo | foo | bar | qux Block overflow: baz-------------> foo | foo | foo | bar | qux Now isn't that a lot more sane and consist? Note it is incorrect to assume baz is centered, that is why I drew it as I did on the left side with an arrow showing its extent.
Received on Tuesday, 26 October 2010 23:52:39 UTC