W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2013

Re: [css3-flexbox] Should "overflow: [scroll, hidden, auto]" apply to a flex container?

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 15:39:57 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDAJ4m8B_KSmfsvAFcnD8nbvSWO1fJKJ8-2FBA7Yi0hakg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com> wrote:
> On 01/25/2013 03:13 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> Overflow definitely needs to apply, imo.
>
> Why, out of curiosity?  If an author needs custom "overflow" behavior on
> a flex container, wouldn't they be able to get that effect by wrapping
> it in a block and styling the block with "overflow"?  Why would the flex
> container itself need to support overflow?

I see no reason to require a wrapper just to swap between "visible"
and "hidden".  "scroll" actually requires a tiny bit of justification,
because it's not trivial, but neither is it difficult.

> For comparison: "overflow" doesn't have any effect on the <table>
> element anywhere, nor does it apply to "display:inline" elements, and it
> doesn't to <fieldset> in Gecko at least.

'overflow' not working on <table> (or at least <tbody>) is a
persistent complaint among web devs.  ^_^  'overflow' on inlines would
be difficult to conceive of, because they don't have a containing box.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 25 January 2013 23:40:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:04 GMT