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

Re: [css-flexbox] min-[width|height]:auto, and the meaning of "flex item whose 'overflow' is 'visible'"

From: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 14:57:15 -0700
Message-ID: <53CD8CBB.80607@mozilla.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On 07/17/2014 03:16 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com> wrote:
>> Can we adjust the spec-text so that it only checks the "overflow"
>> sub-property in the main axis, to avoid this?
> 
> Yup, you're right.  I'll fix.

BTW: after sending this, I realized that the "overflow" sub-properties
influence each other in a way that makes my concern semi-moot.

In particular, if either overflow sub-property is set to non-"visible",
then the other one will *also* compute to something non-"visible".*

So, the scenario I was concerned about ("overflow-y" neutering
min-width:auto in a horizontal flex item w/ overflow-x:visible)
shouldn't actually be possible, in practice.

Still, I'm glad the spec was updated on this point. While the previous
spec-language was arguably-not-actually-problematic, the reason for that
is a bit esoteric and probably good to avoid depending on.

Thanks,
~Daniel

* (I'm not 100% clear on which non-visible value that should be -- the
overflow spec[1] seems to say that "visible" gets converted to "hidden",
but in current Firefox & Chrome at least, it appears to be converted to
"auto". (Source link for Gecko, FWIW: [2]) But in any case, that
distinction isn't really important to this thread.)

[1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-overflow/#overflow-properties

[2]
http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/layout/style/nsRuleNode.cpp?rev=e8b133697ef9&mark=5347-5353#5347
Received on Monday, 21 July 2014 21:57:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:23 UTC