On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Eric A. Meyer <eric@meyerweb.com> wrote: Yes, *in this very limited and specific case*, subgrids can meet the > criteria. But as I tried to make clear in the post, this is *a very > limited and specific case*, meant to illustrate the basic principles at > play without overcomplicating things, since it was meant for a more general > audience-- in other words, authors who have little to no exposure to grids > at this point. > > I will try to find the time to produce some more complex examples that > illustrate why I believe 'display: contents' is not up to nearly the same > level of sophistication as subgrids. Hopefully others can also provide > some examples as well. > > As for why I describe it as a "hack", I regard using 'display: contents' > to take the place subgrids much as I regard using floats to take the place > of an actual layout system. Yes, it works; and yes, one can do clever > things with it; but it's still a hack, as in a workaround for a > limitation. I applaud hacks when there's no other alternative. I deplore > setting things up such that hacks are necessary. I continue to disagree on that. display:contents was created to solve exactly the problem presented in your example (in a generic way that works with all CSS layout models). I have no strong opinion on the merits of subgrids and I look forward to seeing examples where subgrids are the best solution. Rob -- lbir ye,ea yer.tnietoehr rdn rdsme,anea lurpr edna e hnysnenh hhe uresyf toD selthor stor edna siewaoeodm or v sstvr esBa kbvted,t rdsme,aoreseoouoto o l euetiuruewFa kbn e hnystoivateweh uresyf tulsa rehr rdm or rnea lurpr .a war hsrer holsa rodvted,t nenh hneireseoouot.tniesiewaoeivatewt sstvr esnReceived on Wednesday, 27 January 2016 02:29:03 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:56 UTC