Comments by "Mikko Rantalainen" (@MikkoRantalainen) on "This awesome CSS feature is blocked by drama (Google and Apple can't agree)" video.

  1. 24:00 I agree 100%! I think "off" shouldn't even be a keyword for the exact reason you explain here.
    3
  2. I think masonry should be optional feature of either display:grid or display:flex. I would personally prefer flexbox because masonry layout seems more like flex layout than grid to me. If two fully independent browser engines (e.g. Gecko and Webkit, instead of Webkit and Blink) have already usable implementation for display:grid based solution, I'd go with it already because I want this ASAP. That said, I understand the argument that Google is making here and it does seem the best way forward in long run if vendors accept having to write more code for the initial version. And the ability to use `auto` sized tracks with the Google proposal seems like a very nice feature to have.
    1