W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > June 2018

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-align] Rules for align/justify-self on static position of absolutely-positioned boxes need more detail

From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 23:20:51 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-395244125-1528327250-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
The Working Group just discussed `Rules for align/justify-self on static position of absolutely-positioned boxes need more detail`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: accept proposal in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1432#issuecomment-392854468 ?`
* `RESOLVED: accept proposal in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1432#issuecomment-392854468`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic: Rules for align/justify-self on static position of absolutely-positioned boxes need more detail<br>
&lt;dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1432#issuecomment-392854468<br>
&lt;alex_antennahouse> what is the webex password?<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: Only thing to ask is...I had to re-read...now is time to discuss and resolve. The ask was to swap out the direction and have it overwritted for justify-content so static pos and sizing used for abspos items effected by justify-content. THat's the jist, correct?<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Yes<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: I was making sure we want to resolve that justify-content takes presidence when calculating position. So if I have direction rtl and nothing inside the containing block and I have a justify-content:end then basically I will have 0 size for the available width<br>
&lt;alex_antennahouse> got it ty<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: I'm having trouble with your example. If you have abspos and a size containing block which is the parent. Containing block we do calc switched on direction property. Initial value of justify-content is start,start. If you did justify-content:end and rtl it would we same as direction ltr<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: Not quite.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: That's the proposal<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: This wasn't clear from the linked comment<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Not sure. Point is right now we have different behavior for ltr and ltl for static pos. Also size of an auto size abspos depends on direction of static pos containing. We prop we depend on justify-content which then itself depends on direction.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: Okay, that should work out<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: When you have orthogonal chcanges in direction between parent and containing block?<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: No behavior change. What happens today it's the same behavior we want with a slight complication since center is new.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: Ccenter is the half way between?<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: more or less, yes.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: Then I'm more or less okay with it :)<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: With all the information I've heard and read I'm fine with it.<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Other opinions on the new center behavior?<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Objections to accepting  https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1432#issuecomment-392854468 ?<br>
&lt;dael> RESOLVED: accept proposal in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1432#issuecomment-392854468 ?<br>
&lt;dael> RESOLVED: accept proposal in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1432#issuecomment-392854468<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1432#issuecomment-395244125 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2018 23:20:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 6 June 2018 23:20:56 UTC