- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 14:24:03 -0800
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Summary:
- discussed February F2F logistics
- objection to publishing CSS3 Text LC before next F2F
- RESOLVED: Publish CSS3 Fonts WD
- RESOLVED: No exceptional zeroing of negative margins for flex items.
- RESOLVED: Min/max clamping step of resolving flexible lengths does
not pass cross-size limits through aspect ratio into main
size flex computations.
- Various Flexbox clarifications reviewed:
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/diff/2dfe9b0d813f/css3-flexbox/Overview.src.html
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/diff/c963d3ec23b8/css3-flexbox/Overview.src.html
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/diff/9d29cc6d8a95/css3-flexbox/Overview.src.html
- Issue on handling aspect ratio during main size computations still
being worked out:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Oct/0781.html
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/diff/284a967553ae/css3-flexbox/Overview.src.html
- Discussed case-sensitivity of CSS identifiers. i18n recommends
case-folding. Anne recommends ascii-folding.
Points brought up:
- Some implementations seem to do some form of Unicode case-insensitivity
for class name matching. Some do ASCII-only.
- HTML spec requires ASCII-folding only for its case-insensitivity
- ASCII-folding is easier to implement correctly
- ASCII-folding is really weird for non-English languages with case
Previous uses of case-insensitivity were ASCII-only idents,
where this wasn't a usability issue.
No conclusions yet.
~fantasai
Received on Friday, 7 December 2012 22:24:32 UTC