- From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 16:55:56 -0400
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Anton Prowse" <prowse@moonhenge.net>, "www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>
On 29/04/2012 17:49, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 2:01 AM, Anton Prowse<prowse@moonhenge.net> wrote: >> On 29/04/2012 04:25, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Anton Prowse<prowse@moonhenge.net> >> wrote: >>>> I read you as saying: table fixup occurs before flexbox does its thing, >>>> but block-in-inline fixup occurs after [flexbox does its thing]. This >>>> appears to be consistent with s/flexbox/block layout/. >>>> >>>> ... which leads to "block-in-inline fixup occurs after block layout does >>>> its thing". >>> >>> It's this part that doesn't make sense. I never mentioned block >>> layout. Why are you asking me a question about it in relation to >>> flexbox? >> >> Sure you did. I'm asking you a question about it because you offered it >> as justification of a particular choice of behaviour in flexbox layout. >> >> Perhaps it's easier if you could just express what you wrote below in >> different terms? >> >> On 26/01/2012 00:14, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >>> For clarity, I have currently specified that table-fixup occurs >>> *before* flexbox does its thing, but block-in-inline fixup occurs >>> *after*. This appears to be consistent with how these two fixup steps >>> occur in _block layout_, based on the limited testing I've done so >>> far. >> >> (My emphasis expressed with '_') > > Oh! Now I get it. > > I just meant that, if you're in block layout, you can tell that > table-fixup occurs before block-in-inline fixup occurs. > block-in-inline fixup is *part of* block layout; it doesn't happen > *after*. OK, that's what I guessed you meant. So it doesn't really provide any precedent to help determine whether block-in-inline fixup should occur before or after flexbox does its thing. Anyhow, I think the behaviour you've chosen is the better one; I really was just interested in whether there /were/ any precedents. Cheers, Anton Prowse http://dev.moonhenge.net
Received on Sunday, 29 April 2012 20:56:25 UTC