W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2012

Re: [css3-flexbox] order

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 10:10:36 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDD5JRJmCgobbJC9nT9rVFhG1MugHHoQOR-SAtny3Mpimg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org> wrote:
> 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).

That seems quite reasonable, then.

> 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.

This is a general argument against *all* positioning schemes that
don't maintain a close relationship with document order, including
both Grid Layout and Regions.  Heck, it's actually an argument against
row-reverse flexboxes, too, because dragging from one box to the
"next" will suddenly flip the range around.

I think what it actually means is that we need a less naive treatment
of selections.  (I don't know what that would be, though.)
Received on Thursday, 24 May 2012 17:11:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:16 UTC