- From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
- Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 13:31:51 +1200
- To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Cc: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Received on Monday, 13 April 2009 01:32:29 UTC
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk < news@terrainformatica.com> wrote: > How this > > #A { width: 200px; box-flex: 1; } > > is different from this: > > #A { min-width: 200px; width:1*; } > > ? > I thought my example was pretty clear already. But anyway, compare #A { width: 200px; box-flex: 1; } #B { width: 100px; box-flex: 1; } to #A { min-width: 200px; width:1*; } #B { min-width: 100px; width:1*; } in a container of width 400px. In the box-flex case, A and B get widths 250px and 150px. In the width:1* case, A and B both get width 200px. Rob -- "He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah 53:5-6]
Received on Monday, 13 April 2009 01:32:29 UTC