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

RE: [css3-flexbox]shrinking flex:0 items

From: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 19:38:16 +0000
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: "www-style@w3.org list" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D51C9E849DDD0D4EA38C2E539856928412D6F84B@TK5EX14MBXC218.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Actually this is an equivalent of having "flex groups" (which we have cut from the spec for now). Small negative flex is not exactly same -- small flexibility allows for small changes, and as soon as width is infinitely smaller than preferred you get text wrap...

I think we are in agreement so far that we don't want to add this behavior. 


-----Original Message-----
From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 11:03 AM
To: Alex Mogilevsky
Cc: www-style@w3.org list
Subject: Re: [css3-flexbox]shrinking flex:0 items

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote:
> I have noticed that Webkit flexbox implementation (the old-spec) will 
> shrink items with zero flexibility when there are no flexible items, 
> or all flexible content has reached min-width.
> Is that a desired behavior? I seems useful, probably a good default. 
> It may be worth considering for standard behavior.
> I think I am more against it than for it – it is usually a good 
> experience, but it muddles the concept of “no flexibility”. If 
> somebody wants that behavior, they can use very small flexibility.

I don't think it's worthwhile to guess the author's intent here.  We should keep the layout model predictable, since it's easy to obtain that behavior if you want it - as you say, just set the negative flex to a number much smaller than other neg-flex stuff, and it'll only significantly shrink when everything else has reached its minimum size.


Received on Tuesday, 22 November 2011 19:39:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:52 UTC