W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2010

Re: [css-flexbox] "applies to" inconsistency

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 19:34:07 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTin2Mkzki984OVUlQG32Rl2-vtDg16MMAlX9zs8o@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
Cc: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, "www-style@w3.org list" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote:
> From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com]
>> Absposing an element should take it out of the flow entirely, and not interact with its siblings or ancestors in any way.
> Actually that is no true for absolute positioning in general. Unfortunately. If some of coordinates are not specified, coordinates of element's "static" position are used. But "static" position doesn't really exist, so it is an estimate of where it would be hypothetically if it weren't positioned.
> (if the above doesn't make sense, ask for an example)
> For a flex item, the hypothetical static position is probably where it would have been if it had width/height of zero and flex of zero. Alignment may make it more complicated.

Right, you do have to figure out something reasonable for static
position, which can indeed be difficult in a dynamic layout algorithm
like flexbox.  But it's a solveable problem.

Aside from that, though, abspos elements should not participate in any
way in the layout algorithm of their parent.

Received on Wednesday, 12 May 2010 02:35:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:07:46 UTC