W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2012

Re: [css3-flexbox] min/max need to be swapped in step 6 of "resolve the flexible lengths"

From: Morten Stenshorne <mstensho@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:53:44 +0200
To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
Cc: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <87r4vlcw6v.fsf@aeneas.oslo.osa>
Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> writes:

> I think you are right, it should say
>
> 	Positive: Freeze items with min violations, and return to step 2.
> 	Negative: Freeze items with max violations, and return to step 2.
>
> The idea is that if all of the min/max adjustment add more space
> (negative total change in item size), we freeze the items that do add
> space (max vaiolations) and vice versa.

And if the next iteration for some reason causes other items to be
violated, the previously violated items aren't unfrozen for the third
iteration - right?

I'm a bit curious about the following in step 4:

    4.1 If the free space is positive, but step 1 chose negative flexibility, do nothing
    4.2 If the free space is negative, but step 1 chose positive flexibility, do nothing

Is this necessary? And also: how can this situation occur at all? If we
never unfreeze items, the steps above seem unnecessary. There will be no
infinite loops.

-- 
---- Morten Stenshorne, developer, Opera Software ASA ----
---- Office: +47 23693206 ---- Cellular: +47 93440112 ----
------------------ http://www.opera.com/ -----------------
Received on Wednesday, 18 April 2012 07:54:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:52 GMT