- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 12:57:26 -0700
- To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
fantasai and I were discussing the logical names today while revising Alignment, and we came up with a new idea for logical axis naming that we think will be a lot more palatable to people, and makes a ton of sense in a lot of different contexts. The idea is this: use start/end for *both* axises. When this would be ambiguous, call them block-start/end and inline-start/end. This has several benefits: 1. No new names - it keeps us within the existing set of logical names, which are already accepted as reasonable. 2. Context-sensitive - most properties that use logical directions only work in a single axis, so it's not really important whether it's block or inline axis. This suggestion avoids the author having to think about it. 3. Context-neutral - some properties, such as the Alignment properties, can apply to either axis depending on context. Using different names for the block and inline axises makes this hard to deal with, as you need to accept both of them in both properties, and just map one to the other. Our suggestion avoids this - they'll only accept start/end, and it'll be the appropriate axis. 4. Legacy-compatible - the only current logical properties are inline-axis, and they use start/end already, so they'd be unchanged. New properties would cleanly slot into this pre-established pattern. 5. This suggestion helps us establish a decent short name for the axises, so that logical properties can be named appropriately. For example, margin-block and margin-inline would be the margin properties for the block and inline axis. There are only a few draft properties/values that would need naming changes. The most obvious are in Grid - the grid-before/after/start/end properties would be renamed to grid-row-start/end and grid-column-start/end. This is not only more obvious (I still have to think about which one I want when writing examples), but it also follows the shorthand/longhand naming strategy more closely, without being too long. Thoughts? We're going to go ahead and edit Alignment accordingly today, but we can revert if necessary. ~TJ and fantasai
Received on Thursday, 11 April 2013 19:58:14 UTC