- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 23:54:47 -0400
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>, Rossen Atanassov <Rossen.Atanassov@microsoft.com>
On 7/18/13 9:03 PM, fantasai wrote: > I'm similarly unconvinced. It certainly seems simpler just to > do the computed value fixup At least for Gecko's implementation, I suspect it's about the same simplicity for either one, actually... The table code is just there, and doesn't care that the parent is a flexbox, while the fixup is pretty simple to do either way, since you already have to do it in some cases. > and would probably be useful in > cases where you want flexbox, but use table layout as a backup. This is an interesting use case.... > bz, dholbert, Rossen, any thoughts? I'm not sure. To some extent this felt to me like a situation that would never arise in practice until you brought up the fallback to table layout. -Boris
Received on Friday, 19 July 2013 03:55:18 UTC