W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2009

Re: [CSS3] Flexible Flow Module, proposal.

From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 16:17:45 -0700
Message-ID: <49E27699.7010003@terrainformatica.com>
To: Zack Weinberg <zweinberg@mozilla.com>
CC: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Zack Weinberg wrote:
> "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 5:14 AM, Tab Atkins Jr.
>> I think the biggest limitation is not
>> being able to set width to "intrinsic width plus flex". The
>> limitations can probably be fixed, although the fixes might add
>> complexity or ugliness.
> What about something like "width: calc(100px + 1fl)" or 
> "width: calc(100% + 1fl)" ?  I'm not sure exactly what you
> mean by "intrinsic width plus flex"; I'm going by analogy with
> the fill[l[l]] units in TeX; but this seems natural enough.
> (very much -1 on "*" as unit specifier btw - let's not make the core
> lexical syntax any worse than it already is please)
> zw

Flex units cannot be used in the calc() by its definition:
"The expression within the parethesis is computed at the same time as 
'em' lengths are computed"[1]. Flex computation happens after calc() is 

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-values/#calc
(BTW: "parethesis" here are "parenthesis")

Andrew Fedoniouk.

Received on Sunday, 12 April 2009 23:18:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:07:35 UTC