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 14:27:19 +1200
Message-ID: <11e306600904121927h3b23887excd81831acd9a8315@mail.gmail.com>
To: Zack Weinberg <zweinberg@mozilla.com>
Cc: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Zack Weinberg <zweinberg@mozilla.com>wrote:

> I'm not fond of the box-flex idea because it's not obvious which
> dimension, or even which *axis*, it applies to.  Keep it around for XUL
> back compat, sure, but not the recommended way forward.


It's no less obvious than it already is for XUL users, and we haven't had
complaints in that area AFAIK.

As a side issue, what's the rationale for restricting flex units to
> some subset of the box dimension properties?  I would think it would be
> useful in any length property.
>

To limit complexity.

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 02:27:56 GMT

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