W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2015

Re: [css-multicol][css-sizing] Intrinsic Sizes of Multi-column Elements

From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 18:49:01 +0200
Message-ID: <551C217D.7020102@exyr.org>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 01/04/15 18:33, fantasai wrote:
> On 03/26/2015 09:19 AM, Simon Sapin wrote:
>> On 26/03/15 00:37, fantasai wrote:
>>>>> col-width + height
>>>>>      min = used col-count == 1 ?
>>>>>              min-content : column-width * used column count
>>>>>      max = column-width * used column count
>>>>>      Implemented by: Nobody
>>>>
>>>> I think you'd need to lay out to find the column count here. Sounds bad.
>>>
>>> Yes. It makes layout engineers unhappy, but it's the only answer
>>> that really makes sense, and it's required for a some real-world
>>> use cases.
>>
>> This is not about happiness. It’s just that "To determine X, you first
>> have to know X" is not implementable.
>
> I understand that circularity is bad, but I'm not seeing what's circular here.
>
> Given a column width and a column height and some content,
> you lay out the content into columns until you run out of content.
> Then you count the number of columns, multiply by the column width,
> and you're done: this is the intrinsic width of the element.
>
> How is this circular?

Oh, I see.

You use "used column count" to mean "number of columns generated in an 
hypothetical layout where the specified column-width is used directly" 
whereas I interpreted it as "number of columns used in the actual layout 
that is eventually rendered to the screen." The former is indeed not 
circular.

-- 
Simon Sapin
Received on Wednesday, 1 April 2015 16:49:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:30 UTC