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

Re: [CSS3] Flexible Flow Module, proposal.

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 13:31:51 +1200
Message-ID: <11e306600904121831wab9a631k8a63053b75836808@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Cc: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk <
news@terrainformatica.com> wrote:

> How this
>
> #A { width: 200px; box-flex: 1; }
>
> is different from this:
>
> #A { min-width: 200px; width:1*; }
>
> ?
>

I thought my example was pretty clear already. But anyway, compare
#A { width: 200px; box-flex: 1; }
#B { width: 100px; box-flex: 1; }
to
#A { min-width: 200px; width:1*; }
#B { min-width: 100px; width:1*; }
in a container of width 400px. In the box-flex case, A and B get widths
250px and 150px. In the width:1* case, A and B both get width 200px.

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]
Received on Monday, 13 April 2009 01:32:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 03:46:58 GMT