Re: [css-logical-properties] the 'inline-{start,end}' values for 'float' and 'clear'

On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> 2015-11-13 13:59 GMT-08:00 Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>:
>
>>
>>
>> > On Nov 13, 2015, at 11:20 AM, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Back up a bit, the original request was "is it safe to ship
>> > 1-dimensional floats with logical directional values?" and while it'd
>> > be ideal to figure out the final syntax for 2-dimensional floats to
>> > answer to that question, I don't think it's absolutely required, as
>> > long as we can agree that:
>> >
>> > 1. If no other 2-dimensional-related properties are set (e.g.,
>> > float-reference), and
>> > 2. If either 'start' or 'end' is specified
>> >
>> > we will handle it as 1-dimensional logical direction.
>> >
>> > I think this makes sense given the consistency with 1-dimensional
>> > properties such a text-align, and shipping 1-dimensional logical
>> > directional values before we finalize 2-dimensional syntax is
>> > beneficial. Tab's response reads to me that Tab and fantasai are fine
>> > with this.
>>
>> The problem is that it does depend on the final syntax somewhat. For the
>> way I'd like it, start and end would be the values to use for one
>> dimensional floats. But if 'start' ends up being short for 'start start'
>> instead of 'start none', that that wouldn't work too well. It would change
>> the meaning of 'float: start'. If we could agree that 'start' is short for
>> 'start' in the inline direction and 'none' in the block direction, then I
>> think 'start' and 'end' are the best choice.
>>
>
> IIUC, it would change "only if float-reference is set to non-initial
> value," so I still believe we can resolve 1-dimensional syntax
> independently.
>
>
Problem with that is that under Brad's proposal there would also be two
dimensional inline floats which would have the same float-reference value
as today's inline floats, as I understand it.


> /koji
>