- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 15:44:24 -0700
- To: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
- CC: robert@ocallahan.org, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
David Hyatt wrote:
> On Apr 12, 2009, at 5:19 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>
>>
>> That is not what I was asking for.
>>
>> Suppose I have elements A and B with intrinsic widths 100px and 200px
>> respectively. Suppose the container has width 400px, and I want the
>> extra space to be distributed equally to A and B, so they end up with
>> widths 150px and 250px. Your proposal has no way to do this as far as
>> I can tell, nor is it possible by setting min-widths or max-widths.
>>
>> This is actually the default behaviour for XUL boxes, so it seems
>> important to me that any flex-box-like spec be able to do it.
>
> Yeah, I just brought this up in my last message as well. The only way I
> can see to solve this for flex units is to actually specify both values,
> e.g.,
>
> width: (100px)1*
>
> or something like that....
I am not sure I understand the problem.
If you will define:
#A { width:max-intrinsic; padding-left:1*; padding-right:1* }
#B { width:max-intrinsic; padding-left:1*; padding-right:1* }
than widths of *border* boxes will be set in the way you want.
Is this the answer or I've missed something?
>
> Flex units are attractive though to me, since if we could make them work
> we can eliminate box-flex, box-pack and box-align.
>
> dave
> (hyatt@apple.com)
>
>
--
Andrew Fedoniouk.
http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Sunday, 12 April 2009 22:45:00 UTC