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

Re: [css-ruby] Auto value of ruby-position

From: Xidorn Quan <quanxunzhen@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 23:48:41 +1100
Message-ID: <CAMdq69-h2ZFpSTCkWuxpyxb9zzoG7n8YxppriOOLnxNOCoxS-g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Xidorn Quan <quanxunzhen@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > In addition, I don't want to see that the syntax of ruby-position becomes
> > more complicated only for some rarely used or even imaginary use cases. I
> > think adding a single keyword value, whatever it is 'auto' or
> 'alternate',
> > to the list is enough to address the existing use cases.
>
> I agree, I like the simplest solution that works for the foreseeable
> needs. Fixing and extending shouldn't be too hard if new needs appear.
>
> > I have an idea which wouldn't complicate the existing syntax, but may
> covers
> > a bit more use cases is that, we use keyword like 'opposite' instead,
> which
> > means the position is opposite to the position before. If it is the first
> > level, or the position of the previous level is 'inter-character', it is
> > equal to 'over'.
>
> Sounds good if "first under" is something we'd like to take care of in
> level 1, but I think it's beyond the basic ruby. Isn't index-based
> (slightly) easier to implement?


Well, after a bit thinking, I guess we don't need something like
'opposite'. It doesn't seem to be helpful even if we care about 'first
under' case. If we do want 'first under', I'd prefer adding another new
keyword instead of making this property a compound value, because from the
impl perspective, this could save much work including parsing, storing,
serialization, and so on.

- Xidorn
Received on Tuesday, 24 February 2015 12:49:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:52:01 UTC