W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2010

Re: [css3-flexbox] Flexbox issues

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:47:53 -0700
Message-ID: <u2mdd0fbad1004151247l9e22b8c0m6211059a4f36472d@mail.gmail.com>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Separate issue!
>> box-orient and box-lines appear to be part of the basic concept of
>> "what type of flow model is this"?  As well, it doesn't look like
>> they'd ever be the sort of thing you might change on a box.  You'll
>> set them alongside the display:box declaration as an atomic unit.
>> This suggests to me that these can be usefully combined together, and
>> just expressed in the display value.
>> Andrew happens to do this already, with his four values for flow,
>> 'vertical', 'vertical-flow', 'horizontal', and 'horizontal-flow'.  I'd
>> probably use *-wrap for the wrapping versions, but whatever.
>> The only problem with this is that Flexbox has *four* values for
>> box-orient; two physical and two writing-mode-oriented.  Are the
>> latter two very important?  Are they, or something similar, used in
>> XUL currently?
> Additionally, how are box-direction and box-ordinal-group used in XUL?
>  Trying to get a feel for the actual use-cases for these features.  I
> wouldn't have come up with either of them if I was designing them on
> my own.  ^_^

box-flex-group too.  You can fake this with flex units, if necessary,
by just setting very large flex values on some elements, and ordinary
flex values on other elements.

.one { width: 1000000fl; } .two { width: 1fl; }

should act virtually identical to:

.one { box-flex: 1; box-flex-group: 1; } .two { box-flex: 1;
box-flex-group: 2; }

Is this commonly used in XUL things?  If so, are more than two levels
commonly used?  If it's very rare to use more than two levels, I think
I'd be fine with the "very large flex" hack, but not if it was somehow
common for there to be 3 or more groups.

Received on Thursday, 15 April 2010 19:48:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:34 UTC