W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2011

RE: [css3-flexbox] Best way to denote flexible lengths

From: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 01:56:26 +0000
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D51C9E849DDD0D4EA38C2E539856928411F435E4@TK5EX14MBXC214.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
I think the default for preferred value is "initial value" -- if it applies to padding it will be '0', not 'auto'.

It may be a good idea to not allow flex(1 auto 0). It is just weird. Can we say that if there are two non-negative numbers they must be together? I think there is precedent in background shortcut property.

For unitless length, it may be OK to require '0px'. It can also be defined that if there are 3 numbers, the last one is the preferred length (then the first two are never ambiguous).

The rest looks good to me.

Alex

-----Original Message-----
From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2011 6:02 PM
To: Alex Mogilevsky
Cc: www-style list
Subject: Re: [css3-flexbox] Best way to denote flexible lengths

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> I don't like the idea of width/height taking space-separated lists. I would rather have a flex function.
>>
>> Given a choice between flex(1,0,auto) with commas and fixed set of arguments and flex(auto 1 0) with space separated arbitrary order, I think I would clearly prefer any-order version...
>
> Okay, then I'll change the draft to accept the 'fr' unit and the 
> 'flex()' function with space-separated any-order arguments.  Sound 
> good?

I've altered the draft accordingly.  Do you mind checking to make sure it looks good, Alex?

~TJ

Received on Saturday, 16 April 2011 01:56:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:39 GMT