RE: [css3-regions] content:flow-from() vs. flow-from

± From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Øyvind 
± Stenhaug
± Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 3:10 AM
± 
± On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:16:08 +0200, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote:
± 
± > Hot about this:
± >
± >  position: inline | block | absolute | fixed | table-cell | table-row 
± > | list-item | ...
± >  layout: text | list | table | table-row | flexbox | grid | replaced* 
± > | region
± >
± > (*) replaced should probably not be a generic replace, it should be 
± > every specific kind - image | button | iframe | mathml | ...
± >
± > (you may have noticed that I didn't put "position:relative" in the list.  
± > It doesn't belong there. Unfortunately it is a "position" 
± > historically, will have to be included, but really it should have been 
± > a separate
± > property)
± 
± But how do you differentiate between a relpos inline and a relpos block?

This is not really a proposal, this is an idea that is brought up with the purpose of looking at property naming in perspective. The concepts referred to by 'display-outside' and 'display-inside' are very different, they may or may not have related names, and they also may overlap with existing properties.

As for "position:relative", in this hypothetical situation (of defining display and positioning properties as if they didn't exist yet) I would keep it separate, as it isn't really specifying a position, it is an offset from a position that is determined before it applies.

Perhaps something like this would work better for relative positioning:

 position-offset: <length> <length>?
 
(the two values are offsets for 'start' and 'before'; somewhat similar to http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-gcpm/#the-float-offset-property)

Alex

Received on Thursday, 11 August 2011 13:48:07 UTC