- From: Phil Cupp <pcupp@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 13:05:52 +0000
- To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Personally I like the clarity that comes with layout-prefixed properties. It seems clear that flex-align is mean to apply to a Flexbox. If I had a generic row-align and column-align that could be shared between layouts like Grid and Flexbox, from the names alone I not sure which properties apply to which layout type. Further, does the applicable alignment property change for Flexbox when I switch flex-direction from column to row? Maybe that's just a problem with the names I'm using in my example though. However, I also don't like the idea of having only a subset of the values for some common property being applicable to a particular layout. For example, if we merged the grid-column-align property with flex-pack property for the sake of having a common alignment property, it's not clear to me what the Grid would do with 'distribute' or what Flexbox would do with 'stretch'. I think that problem is bound to grow as future layouts also attempt to union their alignment concepts into common properties. My vote is to continue with the layout-prefixed property names. -----Original Message----- From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 3:11 AM To: fantasai Cc: www-style@w3.org Subject: Re: [css3-flexbox] [css3-grid-layout] Too Many Alignment Properties On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 2:25 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > So far we have 'vertical-align' and 'text-align', which mainly have to > do with text, but the new layout models are starting to introduce a > lot more aligns. > Flexbox has four different alignment properties. IIRC Grid introduces > several more that do roughly the same thing but not quite. And there > are use cases for alignment in general block layout -- there's been > drafts for alignment properties in both dimensions there (that need > homes, but that's a separate issue). > > Rather than having every layout system design and implement its own > set of alignment properties, I'd like us to take a good look and see > if we can boil these down to a single set of properties that we can all share. > > There are basically two concepts of what alignment applies to: > a) the thing itself > b) the thing's contents > > And then there are the two axes: main axis vs. cross axis; inline axis vs. > block; > rows vs. columns; etc. > > There's the problem of needing four appropriately generic and > appropriately precise names, but I think we should be able to get away > with four properties in CSS total. Values that don't apply in a > particular layout mode can be defined to fall back to something > sensible. I think that's better than having more and more properties > that do roughly the same thing but take effect or not depending on the > layout mode. I'm willing to try it out, but I'm not confident it'll be an improvement. Let's work on it, though. ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 2 February 2012 13:07:40 UTC