- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 14:49:11 -0700
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Rossen Atanassov <Rossen.Atanassov@microsoft.com>
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 1:44 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > Last week the CSSWG discussed extending the repeat() function in grid layout > to handle this case > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Oct/0108.html > and François Remy's extension > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2015May/0113.html > by introducing the > auto-fill > and > auto-fit > keywords as repeat values, respectively. > > The 'auto-fill' keyword will create as many columns as will fit, and > the 'auto-fit' keyword will create as many columns as will fit, but > also drop any repetitions that are empty after grid item placement > is complete. > > I have attempted to edit this resolution into the spec: > https://hg.csswg.org/drafts/rev/3b3554d893e9 > https://drafts.csswg.org/css-grid/#repeat-auto > > One issue that I ran into was the issue of what gets dropped for > auto-fit. It's easy to drop any repeated columns that happen to > be empty. It's less easy to track the repetitions which are empty, > because that's not a simple flag on the column which is empty -- > you have to also keep track of which columns form a single repetition. That's not hard. There's a fixed number of tracks *before* the auto-repeat, and the auto-repeat defines a particular number of tracks per repetition. It's super-trivial math. > Anyway, now that we have gutters, I think the vast majority of the > use cases for this feature will be single column widths, not patterns > of varying track sizes, so I suggest that we limit the auto-repeat > patterns to single tracks rather than entire track listings, at least > for this level. > > To summarize, the options are: > > A) Allow auto-repeats to repeat entire track listings. > UAs must track which tracks belong to a repetition in order > to drop them together when they are completely empty for > 'auto-fit'. > > B) Restrict auto-fit repeats to single track sizes. > UAs need only keep track of whether a track is a repeated > track, and drop that track if it is itself empty. > > C) Restrict both auto-fit and auto-fill repeats to single > track sizes. Same as B), except auto-fill and auto-fit > have the same syntactic restriction. > > Thoughts? I have a preference for C, since it is the least amount > of work for implementers and testers and, together with gutters > and the alignment properties, lets us solve probably >95% of the > need for this feature. I'm fine with the simplicity of C for now, but I also don't have a problem with A. But heck, might as well keep this simple for now, and I agree that single-track auto-repeat + gutters solves nearly everything. ~TJ
Received on Friday, 4 September 2015 21:50:03 UTC