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

Re: [css3-flexbox] negative flex-order

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 16:30:11 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDA73vECVNgp3Ux1uVfD-0dT9fAQm48ftq_GQ=jTEZY8sw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
Cc: www-style@w3.org, Tony Chang <tony@chromium.org>
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org> wrote:
> The old flex spec required natural numbers for box-ordinal-group and also
> box-ordinal-group is 0 indexed instead of 1 indexed. This lets you avoid
> doing an initial pass before you start laying out. You can layout in
> document order until you hit a non-zero box-ordinal-group.
> The new spec says flex-order is an "integer" and that it defaults to 1. We
> should either require the flex-order be a positive integer or default it to
> 0 and require it to be non-negative.

The change from <number> to <integer> and from default to 0 to 1 were
both accidental.  They're changed in the latest ED.

I'd be okay with limiting it to non-negative numbers, but that means
you can't move things earlier in the order without changing the
flex-order of *everything*.  You already have to do passes over all
the children for earlier layout stages; does this actually save us
anything?

(Note - I'm in the middle of a major rewrite of the spec to integrate
the latest decisions and changes.  Don't expect it to be stable until
sometime next week.  I should probably add a note to that effect in
the spec...)

~TJ
Received on Friday, 26 August 2011 23:31:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:43 GMT