Re: The :min-width/:max-width pseudo-classes

On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Francois' proposal allows selectors that use, say, the reference
>> combinator to still work appropriately.  This means that you could
>> potentially have an element in viewport A depend on the size of
>> sibling viewport B.  No cycles, but it doesn't give you *fully*
>> parallel layout.  Like I said, it still lets you resolve all the
>> layouts of a given nesting level in parallel.
>>
>
> That requires shared state because you're assuming we do something in terms
> of levels which isn't really how layout works. If two blocks are positioned
> and not nested we'll lay them out entirely in parallel.
>
> I don't want the spec requiring us to share style state between the layout
> threads.

That sounds pretty reasonable, I think.

Does that mean we'd need to shut down other things too, like region
flows between viewports?

~TJ