- From: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:51:27 -0700
- To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
- CC: Morten Stenshorne <mstensho@opera.com>, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
On 06/25/2012 02:28 PM, fantasai wrote: > If you assume that in the future, 'display: flex-item' will exist and > will be the computed value returned by any non-inline element that is > a child of a flex container, then you already have this problem. Right? We'd have a version of the same problem, yeah -- we'd have style-computation for "display" depending on the parent's "display" value. > And we *are* assuming that 'display: flex-item' will exist at some > point in the future, it's just not in the spec right now (afaict because > we're unsure what to do with it outside a flex item?) Hmm, ok -- yeah, I'd forgotten about that. (In that case, gecko-implementation-wise, it probably makes sense to go with strategy (i) from my previous message -- simply start treating "display" as if it always needs access to the parent's computed style, as if it were an inherited-by-default property -- or something like that.) That makes Proposals A/B from http://wiki.csswg.org/topics/css3-flexbox-flexbox-replaced-children less unattractive to me, I suppose. :) Thanks for the clarification, ~Daniel
Received on Monday, 25 June 2012 21:51:57 UTC