Re: [css-line-grid][css-books] one property or more?

On 10/2/14, 1:38 PM, "Håkon Wium Lie" <> wrote:

>Also sprach Alan Stearns:
> > > > Yes, that’s correct. Perhaps you’d add a class to the elements
>that should
> > > > snap their lines (this would work for opt-out as well). I’m still
>in favor
> > > > of opt-in, given Dave’s evaluation that there would be fewer
> > > > using the grid than not. Do you want to argue for the opt-out
>scheme with
> > > > a single property?
> > >
> > >The one-property solution described in CSS Books gives you both opt-in
> > >and opt-out so there's not much reason to argue.
> > 
> > I’m perfectly willing to continue arguing for two properties instead of
> > one :)
> > 
> > I’m interested to know whether Mr. Päper has a preference.
>My point is that the solution with the single property supports both
>opt-in and opt-out. Noone has proposed a single-proporty solution with
>only opt-out.

As I point out below, your single-property solution is only opt-in for a
named (or keyworded) grid. That’s not opt-in enough.

> > >Opt-in:
> > >
> > >   p, dt, dd, li, blockquote, pre { baseline-snap: root }
> > 
> > This only allows for opt-in for the root grid (or some other named
> > If (as I’d like) we aren’t going to do named grids for the first level,
> > then you need two properties for opt-in.
>'root' is just a keyword, it's not part of a generic grid-naming
>system with namespace complexities and such.

It still introduces all the complexity of specifying and implementing how
box and line snapping occur when more than one grid can be referenced.

>One extra keyword is a small price to pay to avoid an extra property.

The one keyword only works if what you want to use is a root grid. I
expect that most grids used will be established on an element below the
root or body.

>Also, by having that extra keyword we solve Liam's use case.

I don’t think it does, for the reasons I pointed out yesterday [1].

>And, it's implemented.

The implementation in WebKit uses two properties, but I’d rather discuss
what we should specify.




Received on Thursday, 2 October 2014 20:59:50 UTC