Re: [CSSWG][css-grid-layout] Updated WD of CSS Grid Layout

On Apr 19, 2013, at 6:03 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Apr 19, 2013, at 5:38 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> Here's a few things I find confusing:
>>>> - grid-start: -1 means the grid item will go *after* the last explicitly
>>>> positioned cell, but grid-end: -1 means it will go *in* the last explicitly
>>>> positioned cell.
>>> 
>>> If this is confusing, it's because you're thinking of the numbers as
>>> referring to columns/rows, rather than lines between the tracks.
>> 
>> I also find it less intuitive to align to lines instead of cells, and having both named cells and named lines. Why not just have grid-start mean that it starts on the leading edge of that cell, and grid-end mean that it ends on the far edge of that other cell. Then we can use the names from the named cells.
> 
> What "cell" and "other cell"?

Cell = 'grid-area'. 'Grid-cell' seems like a much better name to me, since "cell" is a common way of describing where a column and row intersects.

So, suppose I have this:

#grid {
display: grid;

grid-template: 
"a b c"
"d e f"
"g h i";

grid-definition-columns: 
auto 1fr auto; /* or whatever */
}

Then, I'd like to just place an item in the grid like this:

#item {
grid-column-start: "a";
grid-row-start: "a";
grid-column-end: "e";
grid-row-end: "e";
}

This would then place the item starting at the start edges of "a", and ending at the end edges of "e". It seems intuitive like this to me. Then, in simple cases like this, a shorthand would be:

#item {
grid-start: "a";
grid-end: "e";
}

And maybe even this:

#item {
grid-place: "a" "e";
}

> We had discussions two f2fs ago about relying solely on named areas to
> provide names.  It's not usable.  (I tried.)

It seems to have changed a lot since then, though, and I'm not sure the current melange of named grid areas and named grid lines is better. As I dig into the current version more, I'm finding it pretty confusing.

Received on Sunday, 21 April 2013 02:04:49 UTC