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

Re: [css3-flexbox] 7.3 Components of flexbility

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 17:37:47 -0400
Message-ID: <4FCE7C2B.9040101@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 05/31/2012 02:30 PM, Sylvain Galineau wrote:
>
> [Tab Atkins Jr.:]
>>
>> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Sylvain Galineau<sylvaing@microsoft.com>
>> wrote:
>>> This section holds a note that says:
>>>
>>> # Authors are encouraged to control flexibility using the 'flex' shorthand
>> rather than with component properties.
>>>
>>> Any particular reason this encouragement is required for Flexbox?
>>>
>>> [1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-flexbox/#flex-components
>>
>> Because there are two basic types of flexing you can do (the old "absolute"
>> vs "relative" flexing distinction) and the initial values for the properties
>> are set up to only support one of them.  Using the 'flex' shorthand ensures
>> that things "just work" in the common cases.
>>
> Then I think this encouragement would deserve some elaboration as the motive for it
> is imo non-obvious for authors. Or, to put it another way, I think this encouragement
> will be far less effective without a rationale.

How about
   | Authors are encouraged to control flexibility using the 'flex' shorthand
   | rather than with component properties,  the shorthand correctly resets any
   | unspecified components  to accommodate common uses.
?

~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2012 01:06:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:55 GMT