How do we move logical shorthands forward?
There are several proposals, but one major road block
We’re trying to make progress on shorthand syntax for CSS logical properties. But the path forward depends on where we hope to be a decade from now.
With the release of kanban-style project boards, we decided to move our open design process over to GitHub and give it a try.
GitHub recently released a set of new project-management features, including improved code-reviews and kanban-style “project” boards for prioritizing issues, and visualizing progress.
We’ve been using Pivotal Tracker for a long time now, and it works well for us, but we decided to try out GitHub Projects for our OddSite Open Design process.
My first impressions are mixed. There’s a lot to like about these new features, and the ability to organize issues – but the flow doesn’t feel well-integrated yet. We’ll write about the experience in more detail once we’ve had more time to live with it.
There are several proposals, but one major road block
We’re trying to make progress on shorthand syntax for CSS logical properties. But the path forward depends on where we hope to be a decade from now.
Can we get this process unstuck?
The CSS Working Group recently resolved to add a size
shorthand for setting both the width
and height
of an element. Many people asked about using it to set the ‘logical’ inline-size
and block-size
properties instead. But ‘logical shorthands’ have been stalled in the working group for years. Can we…
It’s not just a shorthand for anchor()
position-area
might be my favorite part of the CSS Anchor Positioning spec, with a ton of features packed in to make things just… work. But there’s no magic here, just a few key parts that work well.