3 ms·
Sic transit gloria mundi... XUL, WPF, XAML ... Main characteristic of these markups is that they define not semantic but presentational DOM. Presentational D
by c-smile 4y ago
Sic transit gloria mundi...
XUL, WPF, XAML ...
Main characteristic of these markups is that they define not semantic but presentational DOM.
Presentational DOM is what old HTML (v.1..3) was all about: all those <FONT>s, etc. So layout has not one source of truth (CSS) but also presentational elements (<hbox>, etc). Systems with multiple sources of truth do not play well as we know - person who has two watches does not know real time.
Problem is that XUL was naively transformed into display:flex and now CSS declaration width:100px is not a source of truth either, display:flex in galaxy far, far away can change real box width in non-obvious manner.
- Spivak 4y agoHow could flex work without the ability to deform anything not explicitly nailed down? You need to specify the relative sizes of things, some of those things might be rigid, and the division of how much each item is deformed is dynamic. You would need all new flexi-units like fpx, fem, f% or you could just say everything in flex is now flexi- unless you say it’s rigid and use the same units which is more sane to me.
- c-smile 4y agoThis div { width:100px; height:100px; margin:1fx; // all margins, horizontal and vertical } will place div in the middle/center of its container. a) is significantly easier to understand b) is more flexible than bunch of flexbox props and c) does not break CSS box model and d) has clear physical model, see : https://terrainformatica.com/2018/12/11/10-years-of-flexboxing/ https://terrainformatica.com/2018/12/11/10-years-of-flexboxi... Just try to define same thing using flexbox...