Re: [css3-flexbox] alignment test

-----Original Message----- 
From: Tab Atkins Jr.
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 2:07 PM
To: fantasai
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: [css3-flexbox] alignment test

>On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 1:54 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> 
>wrote:
>> On 12/07/2011 10:59 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>> I was convinced against main-axis auto margins being flexible, since
>>> they complicate the layout model without really working well (since
>>> you can't control the flexibility - I liked them a lot more when they
>>> accepted the flex() function).  So, the spec currently resolves them
>>> to 0 instead (or should, if I accidentally left out the detail).  This
>>> matches both Firefox's and WebKit's behavior for -prefix-box.
>>
>> Firefox's flexbox behavior requires adding <spacer> elements in order to
>> have some things align to the left and others align to the right.
>>
>> I would like that not be the case.
>
>I believe it's cleaner and easier to understand if we wait for the
>ability to create arbitrary pseudo-elements, which we expect to do
>anyway to help out with Regions.  Then you can use pseudo-elements as
>spacers, and have more control over alignment as well.
>

Cleaner and easier to understand is simply this: { margin-left:*; }

CSS design that will force authors to create artificial DOM elements
(pseudo-elements but still) where they definitely not needed.
Conceptually this is not significantly better than suggestion to
use tag soup for layout purposes. There are a lot of questions
with pseudo elements. E.g. related to text selection flows and what
should appear in clipboard, etc.

Anyway ... I suspect that your perception of easiness leads us to
something like this:

#spacer-after::after {
  width: flex(1);
  flex-order: 3;
}

is this close to what GC team has in mind in this respect?

If "yes" then will things like 'flex-order: 3;' be applicable
to such elements?

-- 
Andrew Fedoniouk

http://terrainformatica.com

Received on Thursday, 8 December 2011 03:05:37 UTC