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

Re: [css3-flexbox] Handling 'auto' main sizes.

From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 11:34:32 +0200
Message-ID: <4F952228.6020504@moonhenge.net>
To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
On 21/04/2012 00:24, fantasai wrote:
> It's not clear to me from reading the algorithms what
> width: auto;
> flex: auto;
> would result in, since the 'width' is neither definite nor one of the
> values handled explicitly in the Flexbox algorithm. (Even if it was
> clear, I'd suggest making a note of it in the 'flex' section so authors
> would have some chance of noticing.)
>
> My suggestion is that it do something smart, like 'fit-content' with
> an imposed min-size of 'min-content'.

 From Section 7, it is already clear what behaviour should result, 
right?  The flexbox items are block-level boxes inside a flexbox 
container which establishes their containing block.  Hence each 
non-replaced, non-table item's outer width is the width of that 
containing block, and so there will be one such item on each line in the 
case of a multi-line flexbox, or all such items will be on the same line 
but typically with rather a lot of overflow in the case of a single-line 
flexbox.

However, the idea of having the combination of ?flex-preferred-size:auto 
and width:auto do something cool like you suggest is interesting, and 
possibly more useful than having ?flex-preferred-size:auto override 
'width' to become width:auto, which was suggested in a recent thread. 
Possibly kind of confusing, though, not least because it then becomes 
*impossible* to just have normal width:auto behaviour.  Also, I'm not 
sure what the consequences would be for calculating the dimensions of 
replaced elements.

Cheers,
Anton Prowse
http://dev.moonhenge.net
Received on Monday, 23 April 2012 09:35:06 GMT

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