Re: [css3-grid] Notes from the Grid discussion

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org> wrote:
> I think I understand better now. We're keeping the concept of grid areas and
> just adding lines as a lower-level concept that gives more control. That
> seems fine to me.

Yes, we're rebasing onto lines as the primitive, but keeping areas
around and defining how they desugar into lines, because areas are
really intuitive and easy for a lot of cases.

> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org> wrote:
>> > What do we gain from adding lines instead of keeping it just grid areas?
>> > Most of your examples below seem much more confusing to me in the new
>> > syntax.
>>
>> The examples were mostly there just to illustrate the syntax for the
>> purpose of this discussion.
>>
>> The old syntax is directly translatable into the new syntax really
>> simply.  Rather than "grid-column-position: 2; grid-column-span: 3;",
>> you just say "grid-start: 2; grid-end: offset 3;".
>
>
> As I look more closely, I think the word "offset" is what makes this hard
> for me to read. I guess it's just bikeshedding at this point and nothing
> better comes to mind immediately.

"grid-end: span 3;"?  The keyword can be anything, really.  We just
need a way to distinguish it from specifying an absolute coordinate.


>> >> Non-Positioned Contents
>> >> ====================
>> >> For stuff that isn't a grid item (what this means tbd; does it mean
>> >> that
>> >> none of the grid-* properties are set?  Is there an explicit indicator,
>> >> like
>> >> display-outside:grid-item;?), flow it all together, wrap it in an
>> >> anonymous
>> >> grid item, and position that.
>> >
>> >
>> > I'd prefer that we be consistent with flexbox and force all immediate
>> > children of the grid to be grid-items regardless of their display
>> > property.
>> > Obviously, text will need to be wrapped in an anonymous grid items
>> > still.
>> > This is simpler for browser developers to implement and for authors to
>> > use.
>>
>> While this is simpler, it's not great.  It's the "you're doing
>> something wrong, so we're just doing minimal damage control to
>> compensate" model.  I think this is fine for Flexbox, but for Grid,
>> there's value in, for example, just setting a grid on <body>, pulling
>> out elements that'll go into cells, and flowing the rest into the
>> "body cell".  This was allowed by the older Template spec, and I
>> really liked the functionality.
>
>
> I don't see what's the value is.
>
> Also, are you saying that if you have:
> <griditem>...</griditem>
> foo
> <griditem>...<griditem>
> bar
>
> that foo and bar will both get wrapped in the same anonymous grid item? This
> sounds like a lot of complexity without a use-case.

It is more complexity, definitely.  I'll look into providing some
decent use-cases for you.

~TJ

Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2012 23:29:23 UTC