W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2012

Re: [css3-flexbox] Computed value and flex-align/flex-item-align.

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 08:50:01 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCQRmmxEtHCOoSkq0TKgFLTqOLkQyuhTRvzVYYpwx1Ovg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
Cc: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 6:52 PM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote:
> ± From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com]
> ± Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 5:27 PM
> ±
> ± Computed values are evaluated as far as possible based solely on the value
> ± of other properties in the document, without relying on layout
> ± information.  'flex-item-align:auto' can be resolved based solely on the
> ± value of 'flex-align' on the parent, so it should be resolved at computed-
> ± value time.
> It sounds like I will have to add special code just to make getComputedStyle() happy. Layout works fine today without ever changing 'auto' to something else, but I guess if somehow it is important for OM, I can fix it. Do I?

As Boris says, this isn't about 'getComputedStyle()', it's about the
computed value, which is used elsewhere (such as inheritance).  I
would find it extremely odd if IE didn't have a direct notion of a
"computed value" stage that sets what is used for inheritance and
such, because every other browser does in some form.

Received on Friday, 27 January 2012 16:50:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:09 UTC