- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 16:05:09 -0700
- To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote: > I don't think it matters how awesome anonymous items are, or not. It is very easy to style anonymous items, only takes 11 character... like this: "<div></div>". Agreed, anonymous flex items are a non-issue. They're handled to keep the model sane, not to provide a useful feature. Since no one has strong objections to any of the options, and among the implementors in the thread, 2 are for C and 1 is for B (adding in editors, it's 3 for C, 1 for B, and 1 neutral between B and C), I think we should modify the spec for C. Morten can weigh in as the last implementor, but his choice will either be with the majority, or tie the implementors but keep the +editors numbers favoring C. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 5 June 2012 23:05:57 UTC