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

[css3-flexbox] Negative flexibility and proportional shrinking

From: Morten Stenshorne <mstensho@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 10:16:14 +0200
To: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <87vcif9581.fsf@aeneas.oslo.osa>
A few weeks ago the spec was changed to make negative and positive
flexibility behave differently.

While positive flexibility just uses the flex ratio, negative
flexibility takes each item's base size into account as well
("proportional shrinking").

1. Why does it make sense to have such a difference between negative and
positive flexibility?

2. Now that min-width and min-height have 'auto' as their inital value,
is proportional shrinking really necessary?

-- 
---- Morten Stenshorne, developer, Opera Software ASA ----
---- Office: +47 23692400 ------ Mobile: +47 93440112 ----
------------------ http://www.opera.com/ -----------------
Received on Monday, 25 June 2012 08:18:16 GMT

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