Re: [css3-grid-layout] semantic zoom in grid's templates

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Phil Cupp <pcupp@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>From: François REMY [mailto:fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr]
>>My reasoning is simple: the first representation (the "fraction bar" one) is easily readable, while the second one ("multiline template") is impossible to understand, and very complex to type.
>
> [pcupp] I think there are a lot of strong opinions about template syntax.  Here my view is opposite your own.  I think one can see the shape of the grid in the multi-line example and not the alternative you proposed.

I'm with Phil - I find the fraction-bar style very difficult to read,
while the normal template is easy.  The ascii-art nature of the
template makes it trivial to read, while yours requires me to do
parsing in my head and reconstruct it into a 2d structure.  That
removes most of the benefit of the template in the first place.

If you want grammar-based templates, I'd suggest starting with a preprocessor.


>>Also, the "multiple lines" string template is unstable.
>
> [pcupp] I agree a weakness of the template syntax is maintenance of the template definition.  You trade the pain of making ascii art for a visual representation of the grid.  Authors that currently take the time to create and maintain ascii art in the comments of their code will likely enjoy a new ability to have their art actually be the layout definition.  Authors that choose not to spend time on such things don't need a template syntax at all.  Just define row and column definitions and (optionally) use named lines.

Yup.  I don't think your characterization is quite accurate (I don't
do ascii-art drawings of my layout in comments, but I'm still madly in
love with templates), but whatever.

~TJ

Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 23:06:12 UTC