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

Re: Additive vs absolute flexes

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 12:22:04 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTimRsfNn3KZExuCQifdrCMsidwl3mmvmVtSgU4Lb@mail.gmail.com>
To: robert@ocallahan.org
Cc: www-style <www-style@w3.org>, sylvain.spinelli@kelis.fr
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Robert O'Callahan
<robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:
> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 5:12 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> As well, this brings up an interesting possibility for what 'auto'
>> width/height should compute to.  Right now it computes to "1fl" as
>> long as the box isn't otherwise flexing in that axis.  Perhaps we
>> should have it compute to "calc(fit-content + 1fl)" instead? (That is,
>> have it act like the additive flex defined in the current module.)
> In Gecko (and I think Webkit) flex is zero by default.

Yeah, it is.  Is this the most useful behavior?  The problem is that
the default box-align is stretch, which is done in the new draft
(which I'm writing right now) by having 'auto' compute to "1fl" in
that direction.  I'd prefer it if 'auto' resolved to the same value in
both dimensions.

Received on Tuesday, 18 May 2010 20:23:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:35 UTC