- From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 21:25:13 +0200
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
- CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
On 07/05/2012 08:41, fantasai wrote: > The current spec says that an anonymous flex item is wrapped > around all non-atomic inline content; and that atomic inlines > become flex items on their own. This means that 'display: inline' > elements are flex items when they are replaced, and not when > they are non-replaced. > Consider a toolbar consisting of <img> (or <object>) elements. > * if the images load, each <img> is a flex item. > * if the images don't load, the alt texts are all glommed > together into one large flex item > > This is rather unexpected behavior, if the author is expecting > each <img> element to be a single flexbox item. > > I find this rather disconcerting, and I'm not sure the extra > convenience of magically turning replaced elements with > 'display: inline' into flexbox items is such a good idea, given > its complications and consequences. I second this. (I couldn't think of any particular reason why this inconsistency mattered when I reviewed the spec. Your use case is compelling, though.) Cheers, Anton Prowse http://dev.moonhenge.net
Received on Monday, 7 May 2012 19:25:46 UTC