- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 11:17:23 -0700
- To: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
- Cc: "Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu" <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com> wrote: > I'm not a fan of "display: flex" -- it sounds to me like it's saying > "this element is flexible". I think we're explicitly trying to avoid > giving that impression. (since it's the _kids_ that are flexible) > > It would also be a little odd / counterintuitive that the "flex" > property would have no effect on an element with "display:flex", in > usual circumstances. > > 'display: flex-group' sounds better to me. I'm not very concerned about people being concerned about "display:flex" indicating the element itself is flexible - "flexbox" has the same concern, and people seem okay with that. However, it is kinda weird that 'flex' doesn't work on an element with "display:flex". ^_^ Since "flex-group" received several votes, and it addresses fantasai's and Anton's feedback, I'll switch to that. ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 19 April 2012 18:18:13 UTC