- From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
- Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 13:51:20 +1200
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAOp6jLZ=9yEL36OqBjBpQazL_dtnbTnVtTgxKXqRe7WpT3uGzA@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote: > On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> > wrote: > > Could we support both physical and logical properties and values here? I > > think we could. So scroll-snap-edge values could be "none | [ left || > > margin-left || top || margin-top || inline-start || margin-inline-start > || > > block-start || margin-block-start ]". (I've wondered whether > > "end"/"right"/"bottom" values would be useful as well, but I haven't > though > > of a need yet.) > > I see no reason why you *ever* want physical snapping. When you would > want an element to snap in the block axis in a horizontal language, > but in the inline axis in a vertical language? That's what "vertical" > means, after all. > In the FirefoxOS home screen use-case, we will never want the home screen to scroll vertically, and I don't think we would reverse the order of the home-screen pages in RTL languages either. In such cases, having to use logical properties is just unnecessarily confusing. Logical properties make sense when you're talking about text. Sometimes we aren't. >> scroll-snap needs an additional value that abruptly jumps between the > >> snap points, rather than allowing smooth scrolling and then adjusting > >> to a snap point (this is used by things like spreadsheets). > > > > Does this make sense for touch panning? I kinda doubt it does. Maybe > instead > > whether we abruptly jump between snap points should be up to the UA and > > depend on the scroll mechanism? > > Yes, of course it makes sense. There's no difference between a touch > pan, a trackpad pan, and a mousewheel, but all three of those trigger > this sort of behavior in, say, Google Spreadsheets. > I'm not sure if that' s intentional or just an artifact of the implementation. Usually with touch-based panning you want the illusion that the content is moving with your finger. Jumping one row or column at a time in a spreadsheet would ruin that illusion, and I haven't personally seen such behavior intentionally implemented in a touch device. Mousewheel scrolling, keyboard scrolling, and clicking on scrollbar arrows are all inherently discrete, so it makes sense for them to jump to the next snapping point --- although the UA could and probably should still animate the jump. Scrollbar thumb dragging is somwhere in between. Can you get a Google Spreadsheets UX designer to go on the record saying they really want scroll offsets to instantly jump across cells during touch panning? >> I'd add an additional property for setting explicit snap points in > >> addition to the implicit points coming from the children, probably > >> with a repetition syntax so you can set up a snap point every 100px or > >> whatever. > > > > That makes sense. > Actually, what are the use-cases for this? I can't think of any that wouldn't work better using scroll-snap-edge on descendant elements. Rob -- Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny eovni le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o Whhei csha iids teoa stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d 'mYaonu,r "sGients uapr,e tfaokreg iyvoeunr, 'm aotr atnod sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t" uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n? gBoutt uIp waanndt wyeonut thoo mken.o w * *
Received on Friday, 16 August 2013 01:51:47 UTC