- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 01:07:53 +0100
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Regions ------- - Discussed drafting page templates spec for next F2F - RESOLVED: bug 15159 for adding use cases to Regions spec is closed - Reviewed various issues in Regions draft. Nesting Style Rules ------------------- Discussed various issues with nested style rules proposal including: - use of & is troublesome for embedding in <style> - OM is insufficient, and editability is problematic - mix of declarations and sub-rules is problematic - need to distinguish that this is a proposal to the WG from one vendor, not a WG draft - invalidation rules could be improved - prioritization wrt other modules; there are already too many higher-priority items on the WG agenda for us to work on this now. ====== Full minutes below ====== Present: Rossen Atanassov (Microsoft) Tab Atkins (Google) David Baron (Mozilla) Bert Bos (W3C) Tantek Çelik (Mozilla) John Daggett (Mozilla) fantasai Etemad (Mozilla) Simon Fraser (Apple) Sylvain Galineau (Microsoft) Daniel Glazman (Disruptive Innovations) Vincent Hardy (Adobe) Koji Ishii (Invited Expert) Håkon Wium Lie (Opera) + Chris Lilley (W3C) Peter Linss (Hewlett-Packard) Luke Macpherson (Google) Alex Mogilevsky (Microsoft) Anton Prowse (Invited Expert) Florian Rivoal (Opera) Alan Stearns (Adobe) Steve Zilles (Adobe) Observers: Jet Villegas (Mozilla Corporation) Tavmjong Bah (Inkscape) <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/02/07-css-irc Agenda: http://wiki.csswg.org/planning/paris-2012 Regions ------- Scribe: Sylvain howcome: I think we agreed we want to achieve modern magazine designs howcome: we disagree how to reach that goal howcome: I prefer a declarative approach howcome: others prefer a hybrid approach that involves script steve: I thought we came out of the discussion thinking that we needed declarative as well as scripting * fantasai agrees 100% with howcome and Bert on this topic and has nothing more to say. <successful re-enactment of yesterday's discussion> tab: allowing the last region be auto-sized would help a lot tab: being able to flow a region into a grid cell (which used to exist with ::slot) would also help tab: with those two combined, a large number of these layouts would be possible vincent: the first one is something we have as an issue. vincent: we also talked about making multicol a region; in particular make the last region a multicol vincent: we'd also like to make a proposal for page templating rossen: our goal is to present a page template at the next f2f which would address basic region auto-generation needs rossen: so this would allow us to go back to the regions spec now and work on known issues alexmog: I think we generally disagree on the order of implementation howcome: my concern is that the first implementations coming out will force the creation of dummy divs through script alexmog: we only aim to enable implementation in this space and gather feedback alexmog: I'd like to discuss issues in the regions spec. <tantek> the Microsoft implementation of regions is -ms- prefixed right? <sylvaing> tantek, yes * ChrisL maybe we should all implement the microsoft solution, but all with the -ms- prefix howcome: i think a page template spec is necessary howcome: regions and page templates should come together is necessary vincent: I see it as a two step process. if we do allow regions to be multicol elements I think it mixes well with your solution vincent: this provides a progression that doesn't require scripting tab: is there any reason why all regions couldn't be multicols? vincent: no alexmog: can we put region issues on the agenda? howcome: sure, i just don't want to make a general decision on whether this is the right way forward until we have visibility into your general model vincent: as a way forward we'll submit a page template, add support for multicols and paged overflow vincent: at the f2f we can show something that's much more complete florian: that way we'll be able to compare complete solutions based on use-cases howcome: we should also look at Bert's use-cases howcome: we need a set of use-cases to evaluate the various proposals jdaggett: I think it would also be useful to share presentation material like this on www-style in advance so as to gather feedback from a wider group <Bert> q+ to give example of what looking at a complete example can give rossen: valid feedback, thank you ACTION: vhardy Draft a page template proposal for the May f2f <trackbot> Created ACTION-422 vhardy: Should I put it on dev.w3.org? Bert: region styling using @-rule is different from pseudo-element styling and creates inconsistencies daniel: of course; we have things there that aren't even in the charter; I won't entertain objections to that vincent: there was feedback at the last meeting on the way we presented issues and I wanted to start by showing how we dealt with that vincent projects css3-regions ED vincent: we're filing all the spec issues in Bugzilla vincent: before then we only had issue markers in the spec vincent: now all the issues in the spec link back to bugzilla, and the short description is shown in the margin vincent: this is done in a scripted manner and matches them with the spec and appends them a report at the end of the spec. it lets you know whether new issues are not marked in the spec. this helps editing. vincent: let me know how to make it more useful <dbaron> I didn't follow what the buttons at the bottom were supposed to do. <ChrisL> inline bug links in the spec are very useful <ChrisL> tools better in a subdirectory instead of littering the root ACTION: vhardy Create a shared directory to post the bug helper script and document it on the wiki <trackbot> Created ACTION-423 vhardy: first bug was https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15159 to add use-cases vhardy: we've done that http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css3-regions/regions-use-cases howcome: in addition to the CSS and HTML, it'd be useful to see any script that is needed to flow in more content howcome: do you encourage others to add more to the wiki page? vincent: yes ACTION: vhardy make a generic use-case page linking to proposed markup solutions <trackbot> Created ACTION-424 RESOLVED: bug 15159 is closed https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15733 vincent: this is about creating regions declaratively howcome: let's close it once there is a proposal vincent: this will be solved in the template proposal vincent: we'll update the bug to reference the pending action https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15131 vincent: originally the spec had a section on how regions integrated with different layout systems since regions don't create layout. this was taken out vincent: then we explained how a region could be selected or created but this was not to be covered in the spec vincent: but we were left with this example and we were asked to update it vincent: the goal should be to indicate there is an overflow area and that should be item 4 in Figure 1 vincent: the point of the example is to show there is a catch-all area ACTION: vhardy Make item 4 a multicolumn overflow <trackbot> Created ACTION-425 howcome: <creep-laugh type="evil"> vincent: Bug 15186 is about auto-generation and is to be revisited with future proposals. Same for 15187. <Bert> (The example of 15131 doesn't really add a layout-based solution, does it? I still see empty HTML elements...) https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15811 alexmog: we are not proposing to flow content from external resources at the moment alexmog: providing flow from external resources could be out of scope, or the Regions spec shouldn't restrict the origin of a resource ChrisL: I don't think it should be out of scope since the alternative would be to write script to pull in content alexmog: out of scope may be the wrong term alexmog: can regions assume that every element or node comes from the same origin? alexmog: I think it's useful to assume it but it is limiting * Bert thinks flowing <iframe seamless data="foo.html"> into a chain of regions would be cool... dbaron: given the seamless iframes feature of HTLM5, I'm not sure how much this matters dbaron: if you assume you have seamless iframes then you don't need features in CSS <ChrisL> is there a benefit to assuming that all the nodes are in the same document? * Bert put suspects that <iframe> will be a rectangle, like other replaced elements. <ChrisL> alex: yes, you can determine element order alexmog: but we want to allow indirection into a different document without changing the style of this document alexmog: seamless iframes does not have that option alexmog: I have a options on the wiki but I am not yet ready to commit to any of them http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css3-regions#issue-24creating-a-named-flow-from-external-resource <dbaron> TabAtkins: there are security concerns with integrating iframes and, e.g., determining the height of the contents, without using the mechanisms in seamless iframes alexmog: one option involves using an iframe element; another uses a separate property; a third uses a flow rule. we can discuss these but work remains to evaluate the solutions as well as understand seamless iframes tabatkins: this should be discussed on www-style as there are issues with it alexmog: the Regions spec should note that the content of a named flow may come from another document vincent: should we retitle the bug? vincent: we can note in the spec that the current version assumes the content comes from the same document pointing to an issue to resolve it later Bert: this is not really a Regions issue but a general question of whether we can have replaced elements that are reflowing vincent: how do we deal with this issue? bert: put it on the agenda ACTION: alexmog to rework 15811 as a general issue of replaced content and flow https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15858 vincent: the spec identifies the ICB for elements in regions vincent: the defintiion was modeled on the page spec which uses the first page vincent: based on use-cases involving a page preview we thought of using the first region as the ICB for the flowed content vincent: feedback has been that this may not be always useful, and that the normal ICB should be used vincent: we can also keep what we have vincent: or we can provide a switch alexmog: this is also relates to regions' interaction with stacking contexts alexmog: if you model regions based on columns then they're not containing blocks for absolutely positoned elements anton: it's difficult to understand when you'll want to position within a region or within the wider document. a switch may be too hard to understand plinss: from past feedback, we may want to be able to declare something to be a containing block plinss: i like having a switch to control whether an element positions relative to the ICB but it shouldn't be region-specific. It should be in css3-break and apply to pages and maybe columns vincent: so regions should not discuss this at all ACTION: vhardy to move the issue to css3-break and remove the text from Regions <trackbot> Created ACTION-426 Bert: I've found that the gr unit should be enough to position objects independently of their containing block steve: if you're simulating multicolumns or something like it, you need a different mechanism alexmog: you may want positioned elements in your flow to start in a region and cover the next one, you don't want to be constrained by your container or its stacking context. https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15116 vincent: I don't have a proposal yet. ACTION: vhardy to update region styling <trackbot> Created ACTION-427 bert: there might potential confusion between styling the region itself and styling on the elements that end up in a region. <Bert> (If the div defines a grid and has a child p, then 'div::slot(a) {background: red}' sets a bg on the region, while 'p::slot(a) {background: yellow}' sets a bg only on the part of the p that ends up inside that region.) https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15828 vhardy: we were missing properties in the CSSOM vhardy: we added a way to retrive flows by name and return a collection of existing named flows (previous two comments by vincent) tabatkins: I'll suggest a different interface <br/> Nesting Style Rules ------------------- Scribe: vhardy <TabAtkins_> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-hierarchies/ <glazou> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-hierarchies/ daniel: i want to discuss this because people discovered the document and started to discuss it as if it was a wg draft. daniel: it is a modification of the grammar. Technically, it is not in the charter. daniel: it is about nesting rules and reconstructing the selector based on the parent rule. daniel: the goal is to simplify the selector of the children rules. This has been requested for a long time. daniel: I have a lot of issues and questions. daniel: first the OM. Not enough. selectorText on the style rule is not enough. daniel: selectorText is not meaningful, you need to reconstruct looking at the parent style rules. tab: right now, there is only the nested selector. Would be more useful if we provided the expanded the selector, including the parent selectors. peter: if you are going to change that, add an attribute to only get the local selectorText. daniel: there is a way to navigate the children rules from the parent rule, but not from the children rules to the parent rules. tab: we are following media queries. daniel: you do not say so. tab: we are going to say we follow the structure of the @media rules. If something is missing, we will fix both of them. daniel: I have a problem with example #5. daniel: the third nested 'thing' have a rule followed by a declaration followed by a rule. This is an issue in the OM, because the declaration is stored in one 'thing' and nested rules are in another. Order cannot be maintained. tab: I agree you should put your properties first. daniel: the order should be mandatory. tab: seems fine. florian: I noted that the nested things last rather than first works better. That is where they should be if mandatory. daniel: you are using the &. That could be an issue for embedded stylesheets because of encoding rules. tab: not a problem in HTML. daniel: I do not like the & because there are people who will forget to use & daniel: I think we should discourage that. I think this is a problem. tab: Ok, I'll look for a replacement. daniel: editability is a problem. When an editor needs to add a style rule, you can look for a style rule with the same selector. With nesting, it is way more complicated. You need to look for a nested style rules as well. It complexifies. tab: if you have the full selector, does that simplify your work? daniel: when you insert a rule, you have to look for all the rules that have an effect in the cascade and modify them. daniel: I understand this is an important request from the user community, but I would like a clear issue created about editability. daniel: for example, what will happen to legacy browsers. tab: they will ignore the nested selectors. daniel: will that be used? tab: people love that feature. jdaggett: for things where we have not really taken on a module, could we have a clear marker, something that says this is a 'proposal', not an editor draft. tab: yes, that is fine. jdaggett: the word "proposal" would be ok. tab, others: ok. steve: moving from proposal to ED is an action of the wg. all: yes. jdaggett: I think this is better to have it here than on someone's blog. jdaggett: should be a proposal until the group takes it on. chris: I did not quite understand the 'expand' the selector thing. <glazou> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-hierarchies/#nesting-selector tab: yes, you have the entire selector. chris: then it is duplicated. tab: we are talking about selectorText in the OM, not in the stylesheet. What is editable is still the short form. <ChrisL> example 4 <ChrisL> div, p { <ChrisL> & .keyword, & .constant {color: red;} <ChrisL> } <ChrisL> is same as <ChrisL> div .keyword {color:red;} <ChrisL> div .constant {color:red;} <ChrisL> p .keyword {color:red;} <ChrisL> p .constant {color:red;} daniel: In example 4, I would like a change. The parent rule has a group of selectors. The nested rule has a group of selector, if one of the selectors is invalid, the whole is invalid. So use groups in the expanded version of the example. tab: changing the example right now. daniel: I have a suggestion for editability. daniel: if you set the selectorText, the implementation will need to match with as many parent selectors as possible to compute part of the selector only, and set that part of not. If it fails to compute the parent selector, it will throw an error. This is required, because the selectorText is writable. jdaggett: one way to implement it, then we could do it a parse time only thing. (discussion about how this would be the same as the current server side solutions). jdaggett: but it would make it easier to manipulate. daniel: I do not think this is something we can _not_ do. dbaron: I am not happy about the selectorText expansion. dbaron: it seems a bit lossy in that you might want the thing with the &, it will be hard to get that. daniel: the part with the & is the selectorText of the parent rule. dbaron: no, the local part. (all) we are introducing a way to get the local part. dbaron: one advantage of making the new one expanded is that we can make it read-only. daniel: I do not have a strong opinion, either way. daniel: I just need both for reading and output. daniel: to compute the style, I need both. daniel: for writing I only need the local part. daniel: with that, I think editors can work with such a specification, it is doable. daniel: this said, the question is, do we want to work on this? daniel: do we have CSS grammar in the charter for the next 3 years. tab: we have other specs, that will modify the grammar or tweak it. tab: CSS conditionals will do that for example. daniel: section 2 of the charter says that CSS syntax is discontinued. chris: this just means that draft is not further developed. daniel: if we want to work on that, we have to find a landing spot in the existing charter deliverables or extend the charter. chris: or we can fit in the existing charter. chris: syntax is in the scope section, so we are fine. daniel: I needed to check that. jdaggett: the bigger question is the priority. jdaggett: it is possibly disruptive. There are a lot of things to work out. daniel: this is the kind of item that the author community is looking for. tab: error recovery rules are working nicely here. jdagget: this has a non trivial cost. We already have a lot that we need to get done. chris: yes, we have a priority list already. chris: the important question is the relative priority. peter: is there interest from implementors to implement this. peter: if there is only one implementor, then we will not get to REC. florian: from an Opera point of view, I can easily see how people want that, but it is not at the top of our priority list. vhardy: we think this is an important feature for web authors. sylvain: no plans right now. dbaron: there is a bunch of other things that are higher priorities. sylvain: selectors 4 is more important. daniel: I think it is clear there will not be commitment from the wg members to work on this right now. peter: do we want to keep this on the shelve as a proposal or do we take it as a WD? jdagget: I think we should keep it as a proposal and ask Tab to mark it as a proposal. vhardy: what are the more important things? ACTION: Tab to mark the nested selector spec. as a proposal. <trackbot> Created ACTION-428 vhardy: from the feedback we get, nested selectors, mixins and variables are really important.
Received on Sunday, 12 February 2012 00:08:24 UTC