- From: Nico Burns via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2024 00:26:12 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
IMO the weird/confusing thing in the spec is `space-around` and `space-evenly` using the concept of fallback to specify their centering behaviour. I feel like the centering behaviour of `space-around` and `space-evenly` (and the start-like behaviour of `space-between`) in the case of a single node should just be part of the definition of those layout modes. For example the spec for `space-around`: > The [alignment subjects](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-align/#alignment-subject) are evenly distributed in the [alignment container](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-align/#alignment-container), with a half-size space on either end. The alignment subjects are distributed so that the spacing between any two adjacent alignment subjects is the same, and the spacing before the first and after the last alignment subject is half the size of the other spacing. Could be adjusted to say something like: "If there is only a single alignment subject then available space is evenly distributed at either end". Or the ratio formula for dividing the available space (1:2:2:2:1) could be stated more explicitly in a way that is still works in the case that there are no spaces between alignment subjects. Then the concept of fallback would only be required in the case of overflow and would be much more straightforward: just specifying a fallback to either `start` or `flex-start` (I guess it really needs to be `start` in order to be truly safe?). -- GitHub Notification of comment by nicoburns Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10154#issuecomment-2041251364 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Sunday, 7 April 2024 00:26:13 UTC