- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 11:32:25 +0900
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 06/04/2011 01:40 PM, Alex Mogilevsky wrote: > ± From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] > ± Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 2:01 PM > ± > ± flex-direction: lr | rl | tb | bt | lr-tb | lr-bt | rl-tb | rl-bt | tb-lr > ± | tb-rl | bt-lr | bt-rl |<the inline variants of these> > ± > ± The single-direction values imply single-line, while the two-direction > ± values imply multiline. Presumably the inline variants would be "ba | ab > ± | se | es | ..."? > > Let me try listing the options: > > Option 1: writing-mode-like codes for all physical and logical directions > > flex-direction: > lr | rl | tb | bt | > lr-tb | lr-bt | rl-tb | rl-bt | tb-lr | tb-rl | bt-lr | bt-rl | > se | es | ba | ab | > se-ba | se-ab | es-ba | es-ab | ba-se | ba-es | ab-se | ab-es > (initial:se) > > Option 2: verbose version > > flex-direction: > horizontal | horizontal-reverse | vertical | vertical-reverse | > horizontal-vertical | horizontal-vertical-reverse | > horizontal-reverse-vertical | horizontal-reverse-vertical-reverse | > vertical-horizontal | vertical-horizontal-reverse | > vertical-reverse-horizontal | vertical-reverse-horizontal-reverse | > inline | inline-reverse | block | block-reverse | > inline-block | inline-block-reverse | > inline-reverse-block | inline-reverse-block-reverse | > block-inline | block-inline-reverse | > block-reverse-inline | block-reverse-inline-reverse > (initial:inline) > > Option 3: multiline settings separate > > flex-direction: lr | rl | tb | bt | inline | inline-reverse | block | block-reverse > (initial:inline) > > flex-lines: single | multiple > (initial:single) > > flex-lines-direction: normal | reverse > (initial:normal) > > Option 4: multiline settings separate, combined > > flex-direction: lr | rl | tb | bt | inline | inline-reverse | block | block-reverse > (initial:inline) > > flex-lines: single | multiple | multiple-reverse > (initial:single) > > Option 5: separate direction and orientation (as in 2007 spec) > > flex-orientation: horizontal | vertical | inline | block > (initial:inline) > > flex-direction: normal | reverse > (initial:inline) > > flex-lines: single | multiple > (initial:single) > > flex-lines-progression: normal | reverse > (initial:normal) > > To be honest I still prefer the 2007-style separate properties (option 5). > It has the most useful default (authors will very rarely use anything other > than 'flex-orientation', and when they do it is clear what's changing). Option 6: flex-orientation: rows | columns | horizontal | vertical flex-wrap: no-wrap | wrap | balance* flex-direction: [ forward | backward ] || reverse-stack * taken from howcome's balance-lines suggestion, to show how it would be added if we decide to add it for flexbox ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 6 June 2011 05:08:54 UTC