- From: Mats Palmgren <mats@mozilla.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 09:46:46 +0000
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Thank you for your answers. I'm looking forward to the next revision of the spec. I don't think you quite understood the third question though, so I'd like to elaborate on that to make it clear what the problem is with the spec in this case. Let's skip the clamping part and make the question simpler: Q4. what is the start and end lines for "grid-column: 1 / 1" for an abs.pos. item in a 3x3 grid? http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-grid/#grid-placement-errors The first paragraph says: "If grid-row-end/grid-column-end specifies a line at or before that specified by grid-row-start/grid-column-start, it instead contributes nothing." In that sentence I interpret "it instead contributes nothing" as "process it the same as if it were 'auto'". Is this interpretation correct? If so, then we have a problem because 'auto' is special for abs.pos. items - it attaches to the container's padding-edge. (Fwiw, I think the spec could replace the above with "it instead contributes 'span 1'" which should work for both normal flow and abs.pos. items.) > There are no abspos grid items. ^_^ http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-grid/#abspos-items The very title of 9.4 is "Absolutely-positioned Grid Items" so you started it :-p I don't think it's such a bad term. We need something shorter than "an absolutely positioned element who's containing block is generated by a grid container". The spec just needs to state clearly that such items do not affect the formation of the implicit grid in any way. I think it's good that the term includes "grid item" because much of the spec defines how grid items behave. For example, "Placing Grid Items": http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-grid/#placement Why should that chapter apply to abs.pos. if they are not grid items? I don't feel strongly about it though - I'll use whatever term the spec uses ;-) Regards, Mats
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2015 09:47:31 UTC