- From: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 19:12:20 +0000
- To: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org list" <www-style@w3.org>
± From: Daniel Holbert [mailto:dholbert@mozilla.com] ± Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 11:03 AM ± ± Yup, understood. ± ± (I was just using replaced elements for my example, since their computed ± value for "display" matches that of <span> by default, and that makes it ± tricky to determine "is this a flexbox item" from inside in the style ± system.) (not an issue anymore given your/Alex's suggested spec-update) Good, let’s update the spec. A bit more of explanation that I started typing already... We have observed a major confusion with cases like this (and pretty much every new flexbox user hits this): <flexbox> <img/><img/><img/> <button/><button/><button//> </flexbox> Which would have been a single flexbox item, because img and button are by default inline blocks. Processing floats differently would also lead to confusion: * if floats always wrap, a div with "float:left" is no longer a flex item * if block status before 'float' is used, it's a weird special-case processing model, and it treats float divs and float spans differently... So we have this and we seem to agree it's good)) Alex
Received on Wednesday, 25 January 2012 19:12:58 UTC