- 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