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

Re: [css3-flexbox] Computed value and flex-align/flex-item-align.

From: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 12:21:53 -0800
Message-ID: <4F21B5E1.9020903@mozilla.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: www-style@w3.org
Actually, I take back my "on a flexbox item" suggested-text, because 
it's technically not easy to determine whether we're a flexbox item or 
not from inside the style system (as discussed in one of the "float" 
threads earlier this week).

However, it is easy to determine if we're the child of a flexbox.  So 
maybe this added prefix should be "On the child of a flexbox, ..." or 
something like that.

Thanks,
~Daniel

On 01/26/2012 12:00 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Daniel Holbert<dholbert@mozilla.com>  wrote:
>> (inserting [css3-flexbox] into subject)
>>
>> I've got a (probably trivial) followup question on this.
>>
>> The ED now says that flex-item-align's computed value is as follows:
>>> ‘auto’ computes to flexbox's ‘flex-align’; otherwise as specified
>> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-flexbox/#flex-item-align
>>
>> What should "auto" compute to for elements that *aren't* inside of a
>> flexbox? (in which case there is no flexbox to derive the "flexbox's
>> ‘flex-align’" from)
>>
>> I'm guessing that it'd just compute to "auto", yes?  If so, perhaps the spec
>> could be changed to clarify this like so:
>>> on a flexbox item, ‘auto’ computes to the flexbox's
>>> ‘flex-align’; otherwise as specified
>> (just inserting "on a flexbox item" at the beginning)
>
> Good catch.  That sounds reasonable.
>
> ~TJ
>
Received on Thursday, 26 January 2012 20:22:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:49 GMT