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

Re: [flex-units] unit abbreviations and the flex()

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 13:33:18 -0700
Message-Id: <5EA3A0A2-B08E-4EFB-823D-C9AE8AACADF3@gmail.com>
To: Zack Weinberg <zweinberg@mozilla.com>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>


On May 28, 2010, at 11:12 AM, Zack Weinberg <zweinberg@mozilla.com>  
wrote:

> Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>> No, I agree. But that's why I mentioned 'margin: calc(1fl + 2px)',
>> which would be a 2px hard lower boundary, supposing that '1fl' might
>> typically be much more than that, but capping it at 2px in case it
>> wasn't.
>
> Wait, what?  Weren't you just arguing for '1fl' to be allowed to be
> negative?

Yes, but margin can't be less than zero. I guess I was thinking margin  
would hit zero, not go any lower, and then the 2px would be added  
back, but you're right, that doesn't really make mathmatical sense. 
  
Received on Friday, 28 May 2010 20:34:02 GMT

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