Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[css-display-4] Initial value of reading-flow #11396

Open
fantasai opened this issue Dec 19, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

[css-display-4] Initial value of reading-flow #11396

fantasai opened this issue Dec 19, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@fantasai
Copy link
Collaborator

We had in the past discussed the possibility of the initial value of reading-flow handling some things automatically, e.g. dense packing in Grid or maybe some aspects of Masonry layout. (In that case we'd add an additional keyword to represent strict source ordering.) Opening this issue to track that question.

@rachelandrew
Copy link
Contributor

By automatically, I'm assuming that the default behavior of grid-auto-flow: dense and masonry layout or using would be to follow the 'visual' order, rather than source order.

Given that masonry is new, there wouldn't be an issue there as we could define the behavior from the outset. I outlined some thoughts for the masonry/reading-flow interactions in this issue. Having automatic behavior would I think mean we needed to have the behavior more like flex, and have a masonry-flow value as the behavior of normal in masonry layouts.

Changing the defaults for dense packing might cause a compat issue. My gut feeling tells me that where people have used dense packing they aren't too worried about the ordering, given that you essentially lose control of it anyway, but we probably need to look into it. The default would likely need to follow the grid-auto-flow direction (so reading-flow: grid-rows for grid-auto-flow: row dense).

I think in both cases adding a keyword to reading-flow (perhaps source) to reset it would be needed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants