- From: gitspeaks via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2025 18:52:41 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
What's the reason for the downvote? I repeat: > According to [CSS Flexible Box Layout Module Level 1, 9.2. Line Length Determination (3)(C)](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-flexbox-1/#algo-main-item): > > > "If the used flex basis is content or depends on its available space, and the flex container is being sized under a min-content or max-content constraint (e.g. when performing automatic table layout [CSS21]), size the item under that constraint. The flex base size is the item’s resulting main size." > It's unclear what "or depends on its available space" means here, given that the possible values for flex-basis are limited to `content` and the `width` as defined in CSS2. You pointed out that the definition of `width` was [extended](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-sizing-3/#propdef-width) in draft and the new values in [css-sizing-4](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-sizing-4/#sizing-values) . I'm simply suggesting backporting a link to these definitions into the published version of the spec for clarity. Why the pushback? -- GitHub Notification of comment by gitspeaks Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11392#issuecomment-2571382180 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Saturday, 4 January 2025 18:52:42 UTC