- From: Sebastian Zartner <sebastianzartner@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 07:59:06 +0200
- To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org, jackalmage@gmail.com, derhoermi@gmx.net
- Message-ID: <20120622055906.220750@gmx.net>
>>How about this: > > > > overflow-attachment-x: [normal | left | right] || <length> | inherit; > > > > overflow-attachment-y: [normal | top | bottom] || <length> | inherit; > > > > with <length> specifying the trap distance to the edge. > > That is on the right track, but the name still feels long. How about > 'scroll-top' and 'scroll-left' as the property names? 'scroll-top' and 'scroll-left' don't hit the point in my eyes (also not in JavaScript) and having a longer name isn't always bad as long as it is more descriptive as a short one. My proposal would also have the benefit that you could combine the value in the 'overflow' property and use it as shorthand property. E.g. like this: overflow: scroll normal bottom; > And it could be writing mode dependent, if we also had those > keywords (er, begin/stop and head/foot? Yes, I didn't consider this before. What about begin/end for both properties? What are other properties using here? > Or whatever it is this week?). Of course it should be something consistent with other properties' values. The alternative (when staying with left/right and top/bottom) would be to use the :dir() pseudo-class [1]. So somebody would have to write this to cover different writing modes: #foo:dir(ltr) { overflow-attachment-x: right; } #foo:dir(rtl) { overflow-attachment-x: left; } As far as I saw there's no pseudo-class for the writing mode yet, so bottom-to-top texts couldn't be covered with this approach. Sebastian [1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/selectors4/#dir-pseudo -- NEU: FreePhone 3-fach-Flat mit kostenlosem Smartphone! Jetzt informieren: http://mobile.1und1.de/?ac=OM.PW.PW003K20328T7073a
Received on Friday, 22 June 2012 05:59:39 UTC