- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 17:41:05 -0700
- To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
- Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote: > ± From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] > ± Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 3:42 PM > ± > ± I don't see the problem in current spec - the only check done is to > ± ensure that the items' baselines are parallel to the main axis. > ± So, a horizontal writing mode flexbox set to column, but filled > ± with vertical japanese, can baseline-align its items. > ± > ± (And items that fail that check are start-aligned, not center- > ± aligned.) > > I see, the spec says > > # If the flexbox item's inline-axis is the same as the cross- > # axis, this value is identical to ‘start’. > > which looks at item's direction, so I should work. > > I am not sure about 'start' as fallback. In old spec, 'box-align:baseline' on block-axis flexbox was treated as 'center', which may be just as random but should get a little better result (for example when mixing text and images?). > > Also 'center' as fallback avoids the issue of 'start' not always being same as 'before'. Oh, I didn't realize that the old spec fell back to 'center' when 'baseline' can't work. Changing that was an oversight on my part, then. I'll fix that. ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 26 April 2012 00:41:55 UTC