- From: Manuel Rego Casasnovas <rego@igalia.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 11:23:01 +0200
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 23/05/16 23:36, Manuel Rego Casasnovas wrote: > On 23/05/16 19:18, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> The whole point of that branch of the grid-template grammar is to make >> things line up ASCII-art-style. Allowing repeat() in the column sizes >> violates that; columns either don't get a corresponding size in the >> track list, or line up badly. Also, it's *really* nonsensical to >> allow repeat() in the row-sizing part of the grammar, and it's bad to >> be inconsistent and allow things in one spot but not the other. >> Allowing the auto-repeat things in either of those makes even *less* >> sense. >> >> If it's an implementation burden, we can allow it, but I'd prefer to disallow. > > No, it's not an issue for us. We just wanted to be sure > what was the purpose of the syntax. > >> (And we messed up - fixed-reps repeat() *shouldn't* be allowed in the >> column-sizing part; we just referred to <track-list> without paying >> enough attention.) > > So I guess you need to update the spec and avoid using <track-list> > directly on this case. A week has passed since the last confcall where the agreement was [1]: " - Tentatively the group resolved that auto-repeat should be invalid despite existing implementations. And remove the grammar that allows repeat() for columns as it was an accident. - If there are no objections on the mailing list before the next telecon, the group will formally resolve." So I guess we can assume now that the syntax [2] will be modified and repeat() won't be valid for columns when using the ASCII branch. It'd be nice to get the spec updated as we'll be applying this on Blink and WebKit in the coming days. Bye, Rego [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016May/0231.html [2] https://drafts.csswg.org/css-grid/#explicit-grid-shorthand
Received on Thursday, 2 June 2016 09:24:06 UTC