Re: Proposition. Positioning content with guidelines

>
> Before jumping to a new solution I think it would be helpful to articulate the problems you'd like to see solved.  Maybe some of them already have solutions or some could be solved with minor changes to existing specs and maybe some problems shouldn't be solved with CSS.  It's difficult for me to reverse engineer what those problems are by studying the beginnings of a new specification.

The main goal is unifying many positioning schemes to the one.
Authors have today more than 6 positioning schemes: floats, tables
(yes, tables have unique behavior), inline-blocks, multi-columns,
grids, templates, regions. It's too complicated.

>
> From your discussion with Francois REMY it seems one of the perceived problems may be that everything must be explicitly positioned on the grid, and for some scenarios it might be simpler (or necessary) to infer something about the proper position of a grid item based on its source order or other CSS properties.
>
> Does that sound right?  If so, then I think Francois has it right: the grid auto placement feature is meant to address these issues, but still needs some work.  Now is a great time to highlight what scenarios are important to solve with the auto placement algorithm.
>
> What would really be helpful for me is a list of layouts that you'd like to achieve that you think can't be accomplished through some combination of our existing layout types, and why it's important to achieve those using CSS (in particular with the grid).
>

Every author's solution, IMO, should as simple as possible. I don't
want to create dozens of media queries, megabytes of CSS for every
specific case, browser should rearrange the content automatically.
This is dreams of many coders. Grid layout is not better than floats
or tables (display: table-cell), this is different view of one thing.

-- 
s0rr0w

Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 23:18:09 UTC