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

Re: [css3-flexbox] issue 11: wrapping rules for anonymous items

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 14:35:40 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCw0fFvs2x86LSod6vddW7vVvrEy63AG6VfTi9ojrRTTw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote:
> ± -----Original Message-----
> ± From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com]
> ± Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 1:24 PM
> ±
> ± Given the following markup:
> ±
> ± <div display:flexbox>
> ±   <span>
> ±     foo
> ±     <div>bar</div>
> ±     baz
> ±   </span>
> ± </div>
> ±
> ± ...do you get 1 or 3 flexbox items?  Whether you're operating on the box-
> ± tree or the element-tree changes the answer.  In the element-tree, the
> ± algorithm sees a single inline child, and creates a single anonymous
> ± wrapper block.  In the box-tree, the algorithm sees an anonymous block
> ± box, the <div>'s block box, then another anonymous block box, for a total
> ± of three items.
> ±
> ± You can detect the difference again with flex-pack:justify.
> ±
> ± Note that all browsers agree that table-fixup either operates on the
> ± element-tree (after pseudo-element creation) or on the box-tree before
> ± block-in-inline fixup (I can't figure out how to distinguish the two).
> ±  Flexbox should be consistent.
>
> Added to wiki: http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css3-flexbox?&#issue-11
>
> I think your example should produce 1 flexbox item. Anonymous blocks contained within an inline element could be treated as separate items, but it makes a lot of things more complicated. I would very much prefer that anonymous flexbox items don't cross element boundaries.

I definitely agree - that's consistent with how display:table handles
the similar case  where the outer div is display:table-row and the
inner div is display:table-cell.

~TJ
Received on Monday, 18 July 2011 21:36:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:42 GMT