- From: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 22:56:21 +0000
- To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>, "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>, Adam Del Vecchio <adam.delvecchio@go-techo.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
I think that would be the right thing to do. I am not even sure what it could mean for it to not be BFC. -----Original Message----- From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 3:17 PM To: Alex Mogilevsky Cc: Andrew Fedoniouk; robert@ocallahan.org; Adam Del Vecchio; www-style@w3.org Subject: Re: Fw: RE: [css-flexbox] Summary of planned changes to Flexbox Module On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote: >> From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] >> Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 2:52 PM >> >> If this is a problem, you just make the flexbox a BFC, so it won't overlap the float. > > Are you suggesting Flexbox currently is not BFC? The current Flexbox draft says nothing about it, so I was going with the assumption that it wasn't. I can change that assumption if it doesn't make sense for it to not be a BFC. ~TJ
Received on Monday, 17 May 2010 22:57:00 UTC