<meta name="layout" content="polymer or some other layout2">

[gertcuykens]

https://www.polymer-project.org/docs/polymer/layout-attrs.html

Why not horizontal or vertical instead of layout horizontal layout vertical?

If layout just enables flex then vertical and horizontal can enable that too?

[ebidel]

IIRC, one reason we require an extra attribute was because it's more
explicit that you're opting into the layout attributes. "horizontal" and
"vertical" by themselves are fairly generic and developers may already be
using them throughout the page. Adding "layout" reduces
#942.

Another reason is that in future we could have layout2 which uses the
NextAwesomeCSSThing. You'd want a way to mix and match the layout systems.

On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Gert Cuykens notifications@github.com
wrote:

https://www.polymer-project.org/docs/polymer/layout-attrs.html

Why not horizontal or vertical instead of layout horizontal layout
vertical?

If layout just enables flex then vertical and horizontal can enable that
too?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#959.

[gertcuykens]

<meta name="layout" content="polymer or some other layout2"> :P solved, still think a attribute should not be used as a namespace :)

[gertcuykens]

I have been reading more about things like http://www.w3.org/TR/microdata/ and the itemscope specifaction follow the same logic behind a layout attribute. I am all in favor of one standard way of doing things. So disregard this issue.