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

Re: [css3-flexbox] We need a BFC for "intended-to-be-replaced" flex items like <object>, <img>

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 11:56:59 -0700
Message-ID: <4FBBE17B.3060708@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 05/21/2012 03:49 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote:
>
> (I didn't initially notice this text, since it was added at the very end
> of that section, after the giant [example] block.  I wonder if it should
> be higher up, with the rest of the normative text about flex items, so
> that others don't make the same mistake I did?  It seems kind of lonely
> down there. :)  Not a big issue though.)

I've moved that paragraph up. :) Good suggestion.

~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2012 18:57:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:54 GMT