Mason, Chris,

(speaking as the CSSWG co-chair) 

Please prioritize responding to each of these issues.

Thanks,

Alan

On Sunday, May 12, 2024 at 7:47:08 PM UTC-7 [email protected] wrote:

> On 4/15/24 01:55, fantasai wrote:
> > Speaking for myself only (not as Apple/WebKit), as an individual 
> co-editor of 
> > this spec--and from the perspective of having edited many layout specs 
> > including Grid and Flexbox--I think Anchor Positioning is not quite 
> ready to 
> > ship (though I think it's pretty close).
> > 
> > The spec just went through a significant overhaul, with major changes to 
> > syntax, behavior, and interactions among various features. Typically 
> after 
> > such changes, a spec needs some time to settle, and also another round 
> of 
> > review to flush out additional issues and refine the new design. This is 
> > particularly true for layout specs due to their complexity--both the 
> inherent 
> > complexity of the feature (we want to ensure it's fully coherent, even 
> after 
> > all the changes), as well as the complexity of how it gets used (we want 
> to 
> > ensure good usability for the various use cases).
>
> Here's a list of issues with breaking impact, as I warned was likely once 
> the 
> overhauled spec actually got a thorough review:
>
> - shorthanding relationship of 'position' and 'position-anchor'
> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10321
>
> - position: inset-area() syntax does not reflect CSSWG resolution
> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10320
>
> - revert-layer behavior is wrongly specified
> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10319
>
> - anchor-center alignment should not affect sizing
> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10315
>
> - resolution of 'inset' percentages for multi-track 'inset-area'
> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10314
>
> - default alignments for inset areas are wrong
> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10313
>
> - initial value of 'position-anchor' should be 'auto' not 'implicit'
>
> Like I said, you can't redesign a spec and expect not to have follow-up 
> issues. The revised spec was published on the 26th of March; you didn't 
> leave 
> *any* time for review before deciding to ship.
>
> ~fantasai
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/fc6a94d0-0480-4166-9563-4b815fbe5f79n%40chromium.org.

Reply via email to