RE: [css-flexbox] Should a flex container's "overflow directions" be established by its main/cross axes? (instead of its block/inline directions)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Holbert [mailto:dholbert@mozilla.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 4:53 PM
> To: www-style list
> Subject: Re: [css-flexbox] Should a flex container's "overflow directions" be
> established by its main/cross axes? (instead of its block/inline directions)
> 
> On 07/22/2014 11:49 AM, Daniel Holbert wrote:
> > Hi www-style,
> >
> > QUESTION:
> > When content overflows off the top of a flex container with
> > "flex-direction:column-reverse;overflow:auto", should scrollbars appear?
> 
> A secondary (but related question):
> 
> When content overflows off the top of a flex container with...
>  flex-direction:column; justify-content: flex-end: overflow:auto ...should
> scrollbars appear?
> 
> (In this case, the definition of "overflow directions" is a bit trickier. If we
> establish overflow directions based on the flex container's main axis & cross
> axis (as I think we should), then we'd still be using (traditional) top-to-bottom
> scrolling in this new scenario, despite the fact that any overflow that happens
> is likely to be on the top (since the "justify-content:flex-end" styling will
> make flex items push each other off the top of the container). Maybe that's
> OK? I think the "column-reverse" scenario is more clear-cut, anwyay.)
> 
> ~Daniel

It seems as though Chrome has implemented column-reverse differently than IE/FF and that is why we're seeing this interop issue (using the dev tools you can mouse over the items and see this clearly). Chrome is still flowing in the same direction as column (thus overflowing at the bottom) while IE and FF are flowing in the reverse of column (thus overflowing at the top). This is still a valid question and I do think it would be good to have overflow be switched based on the main axis and cross axis.

Greg

Received on Wednesday, 30 July 2014 15:33:54 UTC