- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <andrew.fedoniouk@live.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:03:19 -0700
- To: <www-style@w3.org>
At the moment various CSS properties are trying to compete for the same
entity - block/box flows:
'display' - indirectly but still;
'writing-mode : horizontal-tb | vertical-rl | vertical-lr | horizontal-tb'
'flex-direction: lr | rl | tb | bt | inline | inline-reverse | block |
block-reverse' and/or
'grid-columns' and 'grid-rows' (grid module),
etc.
It appears as something is definitely wrong/missed in overall CSS design
- it shouldn’t be that redundant.
Conceptually there are four 'flows' that we know about so far:
1. glyphs and inline blocks flow (inside line box) - lr | rl | tb | bt
2. flow of line boxes - lr | rl | tb | bt
3. block flow -
vertical | horizontal
| flex-vertical | flex-horizontal
| flex-vertical-wrap | flex-horizontal-wrap
| table/rows
| "template".
4. "super"-flow - paginated flow / multi-column flow and CSS regions.
Probably it makes sense to define just four properties for each entity
above?
It could be something simple as:
inline-flow : default | ltr | rtl | ttb | btt
line-flow : default | ltr | rtl | ttb | btt
etc.
where the 'default' value will be computed using 'direction' property
that defines general directionality.
If some values of 'block-flow' require parameterization then we can use
function in the same manner as for example gradients:
block-flow: flex-vertical(ttb);
Such four properties will establish pretty strong foundation for
further evolution.
--
Andrew Fedoniouk
http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2011 06:03:48 UTC