- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 10:17:24 -0700
- To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 7:58 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk
<news@terrainformatica.com> wrote:
> "Simple" question: why flexbox is not using existing vertical-align property?
>
> Conceptually element under flex-direction:row is very close to
> display:table-row/table element with display:table-cell children.
> vertical-align works for such elements already including
> vertical-align:baseline.
>
> So is my question above.
Because the cross-axis isn't guaranteed to be vertical in any way.
Also, using vertical-align on table-cells was a horrible mistake in
the first place, with the confusion it causes persisting to this day -
vertical-align on an inline element means "align me relative to the
line I'm in", while vertical-align on a table-cell means "align my
contents". That's just ridiculous, and we shouldn't perpetuate the
problem.
> If vertical-align for some reasons does not comply flexbox ideology then
> how flex-item-align and vertical-align shall interact? For example what this
> will mean:
>
> el {
> flex-item-align: bottom;
> vertical-align:top;
> }
>
> ?
They don't interact. They do completely different things. (And,
assuming that "el" is a flexbox item, vertical-align has no effect on
it.)
~TJ
Received on Thursday, 19 April 2012 17:18:16 UTC