Propose to group several CSS properties

[yarusome]

MDN URL

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/initial-letter

What specific section or headline is this issue about?

No response

What information was incorrect, unhelpful, or incomplete?

Currently, initial-letter, initial-letter-align, object-fit, object-position, perspective, perspective-origin are listed separately.

What did you expect to see?

These properties be grouped like below:

initial-*

• initial-letter
• initial-letter-align

object-*

• object-fit
• object-position

perspective-*

• perspective
• perspective-origin

Do you have any supporting links, references, or citations?

No response

Do you have anything more you want to share?

No response

[wbamberg]

This is set in the macro that builds the sidebar: https://github.com/mdn/yari/blob/8485e5d3c1e5ff83eceeefac394e0fc25f34abf0/kumascript/macros/CSSRef.ejs#L1055-L1070 - so you could change "3" to "2". But then we will get grouping for all groups of 2, not just the ones you listed (that is, we would collapse things like clip-, content-, hyphenate- etc).

I'm not sure if that's better or not, On the one hand it makes the sidebar shorter, on the other, any time someone needs to visit a page whose link is collapsed, there's an extra click needed. I think 3 was chosen (by me FWIW) with the intention of finding that balance. But I'm not certain it's the right balance :).

[yarusome]

@wbamberg Extra clicking v.s. flooding the list does justify the non-collapsing of the properties mentioned here, but it seems to me that the collapse-by-number criterion could be improved (well, it should be another issue then).

Take the border-* group as an example: No one would expect that border-collapse, a property closely related to table elements, falls into (or effectively hides in) this group. And even for the rest border-* properties, the border-*-radius and border-image-* properties are somewhat different from others. So it would be better to have another depth of collapsing. (The mask-* group suffers the same problem to a less extent.)

[wbamberg]

Oh, do you mean like:

- border-*
    - border
    - border-block-*
        - border-block
        - border-block-color
        - ...
    - border-bottom-*
        - border-bottom
        - border-bottom-color
        - ...
   - ...

?

[yarusome]

@wbamberg Yes, sort of. No matter what criterion is used to subgroup them (i.e. I haven't come up with a clear one), it'd be better than the monolithic status quo.

---

It seems that applying the same criterion as in the top group works good for this particular example as you show.