- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 07:13:57 -0700
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>, Arno Gourdol <agourdol@adobe.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Mar 31, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> It is tempting to use overflow property but there is a couple of reasons not to. Hyatt showed one (overflow has two dimensions, but only one dimension is forwarded to next container).
>>
>> Another reason is "overflow" describes how to deal with content of the element that doesn't fit in its box. However in this case the content doesn't actually belong to the element. It comes from an entirely different source, and the nature of this indirection is not overflow but rather redirection. If "overflow" was used to define that it would be semantically incorrect and confusing as hell.
>
> Note, though, that if you flow an element across multiple slots, which
> is a use-case explicitly mentioned in previous presentations, then the
> slots *themselves* overflow across each other.
That is essentially what I am talking about, is the overflow on the slots. Except we don't have to restrict the idea to Adobe's slot proposal ("Regions", right?). It could be overflow on existing (undivided) boxes that are already laid out in the markup, or on Template Layout slots, or on the grid cells of Microsoft's Grid Alignment proposal. I am not saying it should be a value of the BODY's overflow before the BODY got divided up into slots or whatever.
> So there is some magic
> overflow behavior going on, but it might just be something special
> that slots do, not normal elements, and it's unrelated to the act of
> telling an element to flow into a slot.
Exactly.
Received on Friday, 1 April 2011 14:14:32 UTC