[csswg-drafts] [css-display-3] The definition of BFC does not includes flex item (#5143)

Mookiepiece has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts:

== [css-display-3] The definition of BFC does not includes flex item ==
quoting something from #1471
> it's not uncommon to call the flex container a "BFC" informally

> I think Tab meant that a flex item does not necessarily establish a BFC, e.g. if it has `display: flex`, it establishes a FFC instead. But if it has `display: block` then it's "flow-layout stuff" and establishes a BFC.

if a flex container could establish a "BFC", why flex item cannot?

I suggest to correct the [BFC definition](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-display-3/#bfc)

from 
- (very loosely) any _block-level_ box that establishes a new formatting context (other than an inline formatting context)

to 
- (very loosely) any box that establishes a new formatting context (other than an inline formatting context)

(someone has added “flex item” without “flex container” to the BFC page on [MDN](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Guide/CSS/Block_formatting_context) for a long time. I am not sure how to correct that page, that's one reason I come here)

Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5143 using your GitHub account

Received on Monday, 1 June 2020 15:11:03 UTC