- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 13:27:48 +0200
- To: Morten Stenshorne <mstensho@opera.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Morten Stenshorne <mstensho@opera.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I think that block-level flexboxes should behave similarily to tables or > new-BFC blocks, when it comes to what CSS 2.1 has to say about > overlapping of such boxes: > > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visuren.html#bfc-next-to-float > > That is, I was thinking that the _border_ box of a flexbox must not > overlap the margin box of any floats in the same block formatting > context as the element itself. > > The flexbox spec (2012-05-01) is almost clear on this topic: > > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-flexbox/#display-flexbox > > by saying that a flexbox establishes a new flexbox formatting context, > and that it is _similar_ to to a block formatting context root, in that > floats do not intrude into the flexbox. > > As far as I can see, only IE10 gets this completely right, while Gecko > and especially Webkit have issues (-webkit-flexbox has more problems > than -webkit-box here in my Chrome). Negative margins is the key here. > > <p>Below there should be a yellow square beside a blue square, right?</p> > <div style="float:left; width:100px; height:100px; background:yellow;"></div> > <div style="display:-moz-box; display:-ms-box; display:-webkit-box; display:flexbox; margin-left:-100px; width:100px; height:100px; background:blue;"></div> > > I suspect this is simply about implementation bugs, but perhaps the spec > could be a little clearer? I think it's just impl bugs. I'm not sure how to produce a better phrasing, unfortunately. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2012 11:28:41 UTC