W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2014

[css-flexbox] Fixed mistakes in min-size:auto section, please review

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 15:28:41 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBnh7RcAmrCuGByit7=1q=ns1+RcCC0txjnD5ggEdcnPQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
fantasai and I are reviewing a lot of Flexbox right now, and found
that we'd made some stupid mistakes in writing the list of conditions
that min-size:auto can resolve to.  We've fixed them, and would
appreciate review.

1. The first bullet point was originally "the computed 'width'
('height'), if that value is definite,". dholbert pointed out that
this should really pay attention to flex-basis on a flex item, so I
changed it to "the computed 'flex-basis'".  He then pointed out that
this doesn't handle flex-basis:main-size, so I changed it to "the used
'flex-basis', if the computed 'flex-basis' was "auto",". This is dumb,
because it's stopped paying attention to the flex-basis when it's just
a definite length.  It's also circular, since the used value of
width/height depends on min-width/height.

It's now split into two lines: "the computed 'flex-basis', if that
value is definite" and "if 'flex-basis' is ''main-size'', the computed
'width' ('height'), if that value is definite".  This should fully
cover flex-basis correctly.

2. (Assuming a row flexbox.) We previously allowed max-width to
contribute to min-width:auto, and later allowed max-height + an
intrinsic aspect ratio to contribute, but we didn't generalize that to
the 'width' case as well, so that a definite 'height' + aspect ratio
would contribute.  That's fixed now.

~TJ and fantasai
Received on Monday, 18 August 2014 22:29:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:24 UTC