- From: Morten Stenshorne <mstensho@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 11:17:54 +0200
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>, Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
"Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> writes: > Per our action item last week, we've defined the static position of > abspos flex items consistently with how they're handled in block and > inline flow: > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-flexbox/#abspos-items > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Jul/0605.html (minutes) > > The WG just tasked us with defining it according to the resolutions, > so please give feedback. In particular, we'd appreciate implementors > (Alex, Daniel, Morten) reviewing the proposed text. > > The solution we came up with is more-or-less Proposal D in the wiki > <http://wiki.csswg.org/topics/flex-abspos-placeholders>, with the edge > cases fully specified. > > We ended up not using the concept of a "placeholder" at all here - > instead, the abspos item just participates in flex layout through the > 'order' step, and then is ignored for the rest of flex layout. This > implies that 'order' applies to the abspos. We can explicitly > disallow this, but based on Brad Kemper's comments > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Jul/0628.html>, we > think the WG should revisit this decision. (My objection to having > 'order' apply during the call was about having it apply *to the > placeholder*. I'm in favor of it applying to the abspos itself.) > > In summary, all we're asking to do on the call is: > 1. See if anyone objects to the current text. Looks good. One issue: if ‘justify-content’ is ‘end’, it is the inner main-end edge of the flex container. It should say 'flex-end', not 'end'. > 2. Reverse the resolution about 'order' from last week. As an implementor I mostly dislike that 'order' affect abspos boxes, but if authors really love it, who am I to object? :) Besides, letting 'order' apply simply makes sense now, since we have "absolutely positioned flex items", not "absolutely positioned boxes wrapped inside an anonymous flex item" (although I may choose to do the latter in Opera's implementation anyway - not that anyone should notice, of course). Just a note: The positioning effect of 'order' only has an effect on auto-positioned ("statically positioned") absolutely positioned flex items. The painting order modification caused by 'order' applies to all, though. -- ---- Morten Stenshorne, developer, Opera Software ASA ---- ---- Office: +47 23692400 ------ Mobile: +47 93440112 ---- ------------------ http://www.opera.com/ -----------------
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2012 09:19:03 UTC