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

Re: [css3-flexbox] Computed value of "flex-item-align:auto" on the root node

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 15:51:00 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDA5pgp0SCMZLBj2Nm6AuEQZs3H3xD7R0KQFbBKBF6esBA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com> wrote:
> Hi Tab,
>
> Right now, the computed value of "flex-item-align:auto" is undefined on
> any node that lacks a parent. (e.g. the root node)
>
> The flex-item-align chunk of the spec makes the implicit assumption that
> there is a parent, in two different places:
>  # Computed Value:
>  #  ‘auto’ computes to parent's ‘flex-align’; otherwise
>  #   as specified
>  # [...]
>  # A value of ‘auto’ for ‘flex-item-align’ computes to
>  # the value of ‘flex-align’ on the flexbox item's flexbox.
>
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-flexbox/#flex-item-align
>
> I see two ways to handle this situation:
> (a) if there's no parent, 'auto' computes to 'stretch'
>      (the default flex-align value)
> (b) if there's no parent, 'auto' just computes to 'auto'
>
> I'd strongly prefer (a), because it means that 'auto' could then be a
> specified-value-only keyword (like 'initial' / 'inherit') and it'd never
> have to be handled as a possibility in the computed style.

Whoops, silly mistake.  It should definitely be (a).  I'll make the
change shortly - fantasai and I are hip-deep in the Pagination section
right now.

~TJ
Received on Monday, 30 April 2012 22:51:49 GMT

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