Re: [css-line-grid] Are named grids required?

On 02/25/2014 04:44 PM, Alan Stearns wrote:
> Fantasai, Koji,
> I've been thinking about how we might simplify the initial version of a
> baseline grid feature while still allowing future extensions.
> One thing that the current draft and your proposal both have are named
> grids. I'm not certain named grids are required for the largest set of use
> cases. In most cases I can think of, there is only a single grid. And when
> you do need more than one grid, the use of each grid is usually
> constrained to separate parts of the tree (elements in a single parent do
> not snap to different grids).
> What if we only allowed unnamed baseline grids to start, but left the
> syntax open to allow for named grids in the future? The first iteration of
> the line-grid property would only allow an element to establish a new
> baseline grid:
> line-grid: auto | new
> where auto (or none?) is the initial value that doesn't establish a grid,
> and new establishes a new baseline grid that all of the element's children
> can use to snap to. Later on, if we find a need for named grids we could
> extend the syntax to:
> line-grid: auto | new [named <ident>]
> The line-snap property would start out just snapping the dominant baseline
> to whatever grid has been established for the element - the closest parent
> with 'line-grid: new' or a default grid from the root element. When and if
> named grids were added, then we could also add a keyword to the line-snap
> property to pick a named grid instead (perhaps 'from <ident>'?)

I was actually pondering the same thing, with the keywords
   line-grid: match-parent | create

I'm happy to update the spec as such, but thoughts on naming?
(Also, comments from other people?)


Received on Wednesday, 26 February 2014 06:11:22 UTC