- From: Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kanghaol@oupeng.com>
- Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2012 16:27:06 +0800
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
(12/12/04 6:23), Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org> wrote: >> http://jsfiddle.net/GgzGf/6/ >> >> If a percentage height doesn't apply (e.g. because it's standards mode and >> the containing block is auto-sized), should stretch apply to that flex item? >> >> Currently in WebKit and, per the flexbox spec, it does not. I don't feel >> strongly either way. Just want to confirm that this is the desired behavior. > > Okay, based on this thread and the existing browser behavior, we've > clarified step 11 in the layout algo to say that it looks at the > *computed* value of the cross-size property to tell whether it can > stretch or not. Based on the errata mentioned in this thread, that > means that percentages which later turn into auto behavior won't get > stretched. I think we should avoid using "computed value" here because it's just very confusing to any reader of CSS 2.1 before the bug raised by Anton is resolved[1]. Why can't we just say "specified value" here, if I understand the change correctly? It would then not depend on reading the mailing list to get the intended behavior. I was in fact very confused and thought that this change makes a "height: 20%; align-self: stretch;" flex item stretch and wrote a longer mail against this wording. [1] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15392 Cheers, Kenny -- Web Specialist, Oupeng Browser, Beijing Try Oupeng: http://www.oupeng.com/
Received on Saturday, 8 December 2012 08:30:27 UTC