- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Sat, 09 May 2015 18:09:06 -0700
- 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: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2015May/0148.html ~fantasai
Received on Sunday, 10 May 2015 01:09:34 UTC