Re: [css3-flexbox] order

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 6:15 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
> wrote:
> > The WG resolved to change 'flex-order' to just 'order', rather than to
> > 'box-order'
> > or 'display-order', which were proposed before the call. This name is
> *very*
> > generic,
> > and brings up the following questions:
> >
> >  1. Does it affect z-order?
> >  2. Does it affect tab-order?
> >  3. Does it take effect in speech media as well as visual?
> >
> > If the answer to the latter two is "no", then I'd like to reconsider
> whether
> > 'order' is the right name here.
>
> 'order' won the poll by a wide margin.  I'd like to not reconsider it.
>
> Whether it affects tab-order is an interesting question.  I'd be okay
> with either answer.
>

I think we probably have to make both order and the reverse values affect
tab order. Chromium has already received a number of bugs or our
half-finished implementation where people are unable to use these
properties because the tab order doesn't change (they have to move the
nodes in the DOM instead).

My preference would be to remove all of these sorts of box-reordering
methods though. The other problem is that selections don't work right.
Selections in nearly every browser are from on DOM position to another DOM
position. When elements aren't in document order, the selection doesn't
match what the user is actually selecting.

We currently have the same problem with absolutely positioned elements as
well, but this will become worse as we add more ways of accomplishing
box-reordering.


>
> It definitely takes effect in speech media - that should be reading
> off the box tree, more or less, and 'order' should be manipulating the
> box tree.
>
> I assume by z-order you mean painting order (your term is correct, I'm
> just being precise).  The spec currently says 'no'.  I'd prefer it to
> say 'yes'.
>
> ~TJ
>
>