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

Re: [css-grid] Absolutely positioned items and static position

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Sat, 09 May 2015 18:09:06 -0700
Message-ID: <554EAFB2.7060804@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 05/09/2015 05:40 PM, fantasai wrote:
> On 05/08/2015 04:11 PM, fantasai wrote:
>>> A third issue is, what if there aren't enough lines for the abspos? Some possible
>>> answers:
>>>    * attach to the padding edge instead
>>>    * attach to the last available grid line (if any)
>>>    * create "invisible" grid lines to attach to -- that don't affect layout of the
>>>      grid container's in-flow contents
>> Tab and I discussed this and we're thinking to add implicit grid tracks at
>> the edges of the grid until there are enough implicit lines for the abspos
>> to attach to. This handles both named lines that don't exist and lines whose
>> index is out-of-range. (They're explicitly exempted from the grid-auto-*
>> sizing, so they don't change the layout of the grid.)
>> Thoughts?
>> ( This is http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-grid-1/issues-wd-20150108#issue-3 )
> I've thought about this more, and it seems problematic. Adding these implicit
> lines means we don't know how many lines are between the last line of the grid
> and the 'auto' line next to it. That should be a definite number (and that
> number should be 1).
> I think the best option is to define that for the purpose of abspos, all
> out-of-range indices and names are associated to either
>    a) the last line of the grid
>    b) the end-side 'auto' line of the grid
> and then clamp the positioning of any abspos items to within this
> 'auto'-augmented grid.

Or just treat out-of-range indices as 'auto'.

Started a new thread on all the abspos stuff with a proper summary:

Received on Sunday, 10 May 2015 01:09:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:52:11 UTC