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

Re: [css3-flexbox] clarify the syntax ambiguity around unitless zero in 'flex' shorthand

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 19:16:10 -0700
Message-ID: <5053E4EA.7030505@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 09/14/2012 04:56 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote:
> On 09/14/2012 04:43 PM, fantasai wrote:
>> On 09/14/2012 03:40 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote:
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> Two nits:
>>>
>>> (a) s/flex ratios/flex factors/ at the end there.
>>>
>>> (b) It's unclear what "such lengths" refers to, in the second sentence.
>>>    It suggests that it's referring to something in the first sentence, but
>>> the first sentence doesn't mention lengths at all -- just factors.
>>> Maybe replace "such lengths" with "zero-<length>   <flex-basis>   values",
>>> or something?
>>
>> Ok, fixed:
>>
>>    # A unitless zero that is not already preceded by two flex factors must
>>    # be interpreted as a flex factor. To avoid misinterpretation or invalid
>>    # declarations, authors must specify a zero<flex-basis>  component with
>>    # a unit or precede it by both flex ratios.
>
> Still needs part "(a)" that I mentioned (ratios -->  factors), but
> otherwise looks good to me!

Ah, right!

> (Speaking of which -- the ED still has a lot of instances of "ratio"
> that want to be "factor" now (aside from "flex shrink ratio" in section
> 9.7 where it has a specific non-'factor' meaning))

Good catch. Should be fixed now.

~fantasai
Received on Saturday, 15 September 2012 02:16:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:00 GMT