- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Fri, 08 May 2015 16:45:41 -0700
- To: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>, Manuel Rego Casasnovas <rego@igalia.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
- CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, mats@mozilla.com
On 04/24/2015 03:56 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote:
> On 04/24/2015 03:50 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote:
>> I agree that "implicit grid tracks" is unambiguously defined.
>
> BTW, regardless of what we want "implicit grid" to mean, here's one
> possible resolution for my original concern here:
>
> - We could unambiguously define a new term "implicit grid line",
> perhaps alongside the existing definition of "implicit grid track".
> - Just use this new term ("implicit grid line") instead of "all lines
> in the implicit grid", in the spec text on line-matching here:
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-grid/#grid-placement-int
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-grid/#grid-placement-span-int
Done. We defined "implicit grid line", clarified "implicit grid" to
include all of the grid lines, and fixed up the instances we could
find that needed to use "implicit grid line" rather than "lines in
the implicit grid".
As always, let us know if there's anything else to fix here.
~fantasai and TJ
Received on Friday, 8 May 2015 23:46:13 UTC