- 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