- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 18:15:48 -0500
- To: Kip Gilbert <kgilbert@mozilla.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Kip Gilbert <kgilbert@mozilla.com> wrote: > On 2014-07-30, 2:45 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 7:39 PM, Kip Gilbert <kgilbert@mozilla.com> >> wrote: >>> I would like to suggest that the scrollTop and scrollLeft >>> attributes remain as double data type only, and that a separate >>> method be added to the Element interface for scrolling with >>> ScrollOptions: >>> >>> void scrollTo(double x, double y, optional ScrollOptions >>> options); >>> >>> Calling this method would be equivalent to setting both the >>> scrollTop and scrollLeft attributes while simultanously >>> specifying the ScrollOptions. >> >> I don't think this signature is quite right. It requires you to >> set both x and y, while setting the attributes lets you do only one >> or the other if you want. >> >> I'd prefer subclassing ScrollOptions into containing top/left >> members, and having scrollTo just take a ScrollOptions object. >> Give top/left a default of null, and have that mean "no scrolling >> in this axis". >> >> Otherwise, I'm fine with this. > > Would it be appropriate for such a subclass to also contain > "scrollRight", "scrollBottom", and possibly an attribute that is > sensitive to LTR vs RTL direction? Perhaps this could be an > opportunity to address the issues in Koji Ishii's comment. Yes, adding right/bottom/block/inline is a good idea. > If so, what would be the best action to take if the attributes are > over-constrained on an axis? Would the order of precedence would > differ in LTR and RTL direction? This is JS, not CSS; we don't have to grin and bear it when you overconstrain. ^_^ We can just throw if you have incompatible non-null values: mixing left/right, or top/bottom, or physical/logical. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 30 July 2014 23:16:35 UTC