- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 14:43:00 -0700
- To: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
- Cc: W3C www-style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com> wrote: > What I'm suggesting here is for UA not to handle the overflow in block > direction automatically and forcibly. > > Was this point clear? I'm not sure what you mean by this, so no. ^_^ Let me restate what the behavior in question is: When you have orthogonal flows, such as vertical Japanese text in an English document, if you're not careful with sizing you can easily get horrible behavior. Without an explicit height, the line-length of the Japanese is unconstrained, and will lay out similar to max-content, requiring people to scroll down to read each line and then back up to read the next. As well, if the text is long enough, the lines will stack off the screen horizontally, creating a "T-shaped" document. Horizontal scrolling in a primarily-vertical page is very frustrating. Automatically applying multicol with some constraints fixes both of these problems. By setting a column-width of the screen height, lines won't span longer than the screen, so you can read more comfortably. (Screen height might not be the ideal line length, but at least you don't have to scroll back and forth to read; it's a minimum viable fix-up.) By using multicol, when there are enough lines to overflow the width of the element they instead create a new column downward, so the document stays vertically-scrollable only. This behavior causes orthogonal content to conform to the document's overall flow-direction preferences, avoiding user-hostile behavior, particularly when an author tests only with short spans of content but in production the content is sometimes long. Is there anything in this you object to? ~TJ
Received on Friday, 29 May 2015 21:43:47 UTC