Re: [css-containment] Splitting the "sizing" part from "layout" containment

On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 4:52 PM L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Wednesday 2016-03-23 14:01 -0700, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:34 AM, Paul Lewis <paul@aerotwist.com> wrote:
>> > > Agree! I like "content" and "strict" for "layout paint style" and
>> > > "layout
>> > > paint style size" respectively.
>> >
>> > Yup, works for me.
>>
>> I'm a little hesitant about "content" since we talk about the DOM as
>> "content", i.e., a different part of the rendering pipeline,
>> separate from "style" and "layout" and "paint".
>
> Coming up with a name was really hard here...since you're only a little
> hesitant, will you be upset if we move forward with it anyways? I would say
> we should try to come up with a better name, but after many rounds of
> trying, I'm skeptical we'll succeed.
>
>> I also thought the earlier suggestion of not having an explicit
>> "size" part, but simply making it be triggered by fixed
>> width/height, may well be reasonable.  It would need to be
>> documented carefully, though.
>
> There are some folks on our team that feel strongly there should be an
> explicit way to get the fully strict behavior so that authors need to rely
> on documentation, which I'm sympathetic to.

Pending anyone coming up with a much better name in the near future,
I've editted the spec to split "layout" into "layout" and "size", and
added "contain" that does everything but "size" ("strict" still does
everything, so its behavior is unchanged).

~TJ

Received on Friday, 22 April 2016 21:11:35 UTC