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

Re: Fw: RE: [css-flexbox] Summary of planned changes to Flexbox Module

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 15:15:56 +1200
Message-ID: <AANLkTik-1XYCRLyNHjx0-jket09XHfZZH-eM9h1taY2Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>, Adam Del Vecchio <adam.delvecchio@go-techo.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Not necessarily.  Say two adjacent margins are calc(20px+1fl) and
> >> calc(10px+2fl).  I think we could get away with collapsing their
> >> pieces separately, so it's equivalent to a single margin with
> >> calc(20px+2fl).
> >
> >
> > That's actually a spec change.
>
> A change to which spec?
>

The flexbox spec. My point is that calc(20px + 1fl) collapsed with calc(10px
+ 2fl) is not the same as calc(20px + 2fl) in general. It evaluates to 10px
+ 1fl + max(10px, 1fl).

But I think we can get away with genuinely collapsing calc(20px + 1fl) with
calc(10px + 2fl). Probably.

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 Wednesday, 12 May 2010 03:16:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:27 GMT