- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 08:44:39 -0700
- To: Julien Wajsberg <jwajsberg@mozilla.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 6:13 AM, Julien Wajsberg <jwajsberg@mozilla.com> wrote: > Le 23/09/2014 22:22, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit : >> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Julien Wajsberg <jwajsberg@mozilla.com> wrote: >>> Tab Atkins Jr wrote: >>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:17 AM, Salar Khalilzadeh <salar2k@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Back in 2009 a few values added to the float property in 'CSS basic box >>>> model' module but they haven't finalized yet. >>>> >>>> These new values for float property would be very helpful for RTL >>>> languages. >>>> Please give the module more attention. >>>> >>>> I wanted to hint on the Issue 61 which says "Adding ‘start’ and ‘end’ was >>>> decided at 2009-12-02 telcon. Precise definitions not yet decided: does it >>>> depend on ‘direction’ of the element itself or its parent? " >>>> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-box/#the-float-property >>>> >>>> I strongly believe that start/end should depend on the element itself. >>>> They >>>> should follow the behavior of the float which applies on the element, so >>>> the >>>> new start/end values will depend on the direction of the element. >>>> Otherwise I as a developer have to wrap my element with another element >>>> and >>>> change the direction there!! what a waste. >>> On the other hand, that means you can't set "float: start;" on a bunch >>> of elements in some container and expect them to float to the same >>> side. >>> >>> We've addressed this in the Alignment module by having start/end base >>> themselves off the container's direction, and having separate >>> self-start/self-end values that base themselves on the item's >>> direction. >>> >>> >>> Is it something there is a good agreement about? >>> >>> I also agree that "start" and "end" should be relative to the containining >>> box's direction (so, I don't agree with the initial mail), for consistency >>> with other specs, especially [css-position-3], where we alway refer to the >>> containing box. >>> >>> I have no opinion about self-start/self-end, but from the initial message in >>> this thread it looks like there is at least some request. >>> >>> What's needed to move forward about this? >>> >>> [css-position-3] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-position-3 >> What do you think needs to be moved forward on? Alignment is stable >> in this regard; Box isn't a good reference for these topics (2.1 is >> still the correct reference). > > Well, I'm looking forward seeing the "start" and "end" value specified > and implemented for the "float" property. I don't see this discussed in > 2.1 at all. > > Some context can be useful. I work on a core Firefox OS app and as I > result I have the luxury to be able to use new CSS features, and give > early feedback. These days we're working on supporting RTL languages. > The usual way of doing this is overriding all properties that use > left/right. There are tools that do this automatically. However while > this is good for one-shot conversion, this is really bad for long-term > maintainability. That's why I'm looking for the "native" CSS support for > this. "start" and "end" values for the "float" property is only one part > of the support obviously. Ah, gotcha. Unfortunately, there's no real timeline for continuing work on 'float' right now. :/ ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 24 September 2014 15:45:26 UTC