- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:18:29 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 06/09/2011 09:25 PM, fantasai wrote:
> Option 7:
Updating based on criticisms from the F2F right now...
Option 7 take II:
flex-wrap: no-wrap | wrap | balance
flex-flow: [ rows | columns | horizontal | vertical ] || [ reverse-line || reverse-wrap ]
|
[ ltr | rtl | auto ] || [ ttb | btt | auto ]
Any missing directions are taken from the writing mode. Forwards for
a particular dimension is matching the block or inline direction
(whichever) is appropriate.
flex-flow: rows; /* forwards inline row (default) */
flex-flow: horizontal; /* forwards horizontal row */
flex-flow: reverse-line; /* backwards inline row */
flex-flow: reverse-wrap; /* reverse-stacking forwards inline rows */
flex-flow: reverse-line vertical; /* backwards vertical column */
flex-flow: reverse-line columns; /* backwards block-oriented column */
flex-flow: ltr; /* horizontal ltr row, auto stacking */
flex-flow: ltr auto; /* same thing */
flex-flow: ttb; /* vertical ttb column, auto stacking */
flex-flow: ltr ttb; /* horizontal ltr row, ttb stacking */
flex-flow: auto ttb; /* horizontal auto row, ttb stacking */
This basically ORs a physical-based syntax with a logical-based one,
but I think the logical-based one here is easier to read than using
'ab se' keywords.
The 'auto' keyword in the physical space allows physical-logical combinations,
like specifying top-to-bottom rows and having the in-line order follow the
writing mode (using either inline or block direction, whichever applies in
that dimension).
~fantasai
Received on Sunday, 24 July 2011 17:19:07 UTC