W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2014

Re: [css-align] Combining 'stretch' with 'true'/'safe'

From: Javier Fernandez <jfernandez@igalia.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 11:34:38 +0100
Message-ID: <54915C3E.2020307@igalia.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org >> www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>
Hi,

Thanks for taking care of this and resolve all the pending issues we had
about alignment and grid layout. I'll give my opinion below.

On 12/17/2014 03:21 AM, fantasai wrote:
> Tab and I ran into a point of disagreement this afternoon with some of the
> edits he checked in a few months ago.
> 
> Previously the syntax of align/justify-self was
> 
>   auto | stretch | <baseline-position> | [ <item-position> &&
> <overflow-position>? ]
> 
> where
> 
>   <item-position> = center | start | end | self-start | self-end | 
> flex-start | flex-end | left | right;
>   <overflow-position> = true | safe

Actually there were several changes on this regard. The 'stretch' value
has been part of the <item-position>  set because it was a different
concept from the one defined for <content-distribution>. however, the
syntax had the intention of avoiding the combination of 'stretch' and
<overflow-position>.

I asked explicitly to get back the definition of 'stretch' for items
because it was a lot of sense to have such behavior. We could perhaps
tweak the syntax as it's suggested below, but we should definitively
have different 'stretch' concepts for items and content.

> So we'd like feedback on this issue:
> 
>   Option A: Allow 'true'/'self' in combination with 'stretch'.
>   Rationale: This is meaningless, consistent with how combining these
> keywords with 'start' is meaningless.

I think this option is the clearest one; the case of 'start' is exactly
the same as 'stretch' regarding the <overflow-position> keyword.

> 
>   Option B: Disallow 'true'/'self' in combination with 'stretch'.
>   Rationale: This is disallowed, consistent with how combining these
> keywords with the <content-distribution values (space-between |
> space-around | space-evenly | stretch) are disallowed in 'align-content'.
> 

The key is that for Content Distribution alignment we have perfectly
separated the distribution keywords from the positional ones. That's why
a syntax disallowing the combination with <overflow-position> is clear
and makes sense.

If we want to have a similar syntax for item positioning, we could
perhaps define a new <item-distribution> keyword, which would have
obviously 'stretch', but also some other <content-distribution> values.
This would allow to define the distribution of several items placed in
the same grid cell, for instance.
Received on Wednesday, 17 December 2014 10:35:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:49 UTC