W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2009

Re: [CSS3] Flexible Flow Module, proposal.

From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 16:11:39 -0700
Message-ID: <49E2752B.5090406@terrainformatica.com>
To: robert@ocallahan.org
CC: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Andrew Fedoniouk 
> <news@terrainformatica.com <mailto:news@terrainformatica.com>> wrote:
>     David Hyatt wrote:
>         On Apr 12, 2009, at 5:19 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>             That is not what I was asking for.
>             Suppose I have elements A and B with intrinsic widths 100px
>             and 200px respectively. Suppose the container has width
>             400px, and I want the extra space to be distributed equally
>             to A and B, so they end up with widths 150px and 250px. Your
>             proposal has no way to do this as far as I can tell, nor is
>             it possible by setting min-widths or max-widths.
>             This is actually the default behaviour for XUL boxes, so it
>             seems important to me that any flex-box-like spec be able to
>             do it.
>         Yeah, I just brought this up in my last message as well.  The
>         only way I can see to solve this for flex units is to actually
>         specify both values, e.g.,
>         width: (100px)1*
>         or something like that....
>     I am not sure I understand the problem.
>     If you will define:
>     #A { width:max-intrinsic; padding-left:1*; padding-right:1* }
>     #B { width:max-intrinsic; padding-left:1*; padding-right:1* }
>     than widths of *border* boxes will be set in the way you want.
>     Is this the answer or I've missed something?
> That does not allow the children of A and B to occupy the extra width. 
> The extra width can only be white space.

Ah, this.

But why not to use

#A { width:1*; }
#B { width:2*; }

if you just want to distribute their widths in 1:2 proportion?

Or do you want weights to be dependent from intrinsic width of elements?

Something like:
#A { width:max-intrinsic*; }
#B { width:max-intrinsic*; }

if to assume that intrinsic width is max-intrinsic indeed?

> Rob
> -- 
> "He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our 
> iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by 
> his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of 
> us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity 
> of us all." [Isaiah 53:5-6]

Andrew Fedoniouk.

Received on Sunday, 12 April 2009 23:12:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:26 UTC