- From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 12:14:59 -0700
- To: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Hey all, This is in response to the issue [1] on disallowing elements to be styled as regions. It's an interesting use case that I've been meaning to post to this list, and I think it helps validate allowing elements to become regions. Take a look at http://ilovetypography.com/2012/04/06/type-camp-india/ The markup here has the article text broken up by images. The images are sometimes related to the surrounding text, and sometimes not. It's a good responsive design, fiddling with columns and margins to keep things readable as the viewport width changes. The markup looks something like this: <div class="story">...Some fragment...</div> <img> <div class="story">...Some fragment...</div> <img> <div class="story">...Some fragment...</div> <img> <div class="story">...Some fragment...</div> So they decided to choose where the fragments of the story start and end. On a desktop screen, the breaks chosen ensure that at least part of an image is always on-screen. But as the viewport width gets smaller the images get placed farther and farther apart. An alternate design using a region chain could constrain the text height so that at least part of an image is always in view no matter what size the viewport is. .story > * { flow-into: story-flow; } .story { flow-from: story-flow; max-height: 80vh; } Since the markup is already divided into divs, we get a region chain flowing around the images without introducing any empty divs to represent regions. The last region would need to be auto-height to contain the remainder of the article. I don't know if the "always keep an image in view" design is the real intent for this particular page, but I've seen this pattern of hand-breaking content to simulate flowing through boxes on other sites. Creating a region chain out of these pre-existing boxes can in some cases improve the design and leave a fallback to the hand-broken content for browsers that don't support named flows. Thanks, Alan [1] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16858
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2012 19:15:29 UTC