- From: Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
- Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 18:41:45 +0800
- To: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- CC: WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Morten Stenshorne <mstensho@opera.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
(12/05/13 17:44), Anton Prowse wrote: > I think this was the right call; after all, the things it contains are > not blocks. The more awkward bit was the flexbox /items/ where we > don't know if they're going to be BFCs or flexbox FCs, and so the > spec is intentionally vague there, which again I think is also the > right call. Instead of making it vague, what is the problem by saying | Additionally, each of the flexbox items establishes a new block | formatting context for its contents, unless it establishes a | flexbox formatting context or it's a box of display 'table' | (meaning that it establishes a "table formatting context"). instead of the current wording # Additionally, each of the flexbox items establishes a new # formatting context for its contents. (By the way, typo here: s/new/new block/) (12/05/13 17:44), Anton Prowse wrote: > It might be pragmatic to define flexbox containers (and flexbox items) > to be block containers merely to opt into things like 'overflow' -- but > I don't think it's very sound architecture. Me neither. Specifically, there are some statements in CSS 2.1 that become either very vague or contradicted if you say a flexbox container is a block container. Say, with # A block container box either contains only block-level boxes or # establishes an inline formatting context and thus contains only # inline-level boxes. , we'll need to ask the spec to say a flexbox item is a block-level box and so on, which seems very unnecessary and error-prone. > Rather, I think you should add a section to css3-flexbox stating that > 'overflow' applies to flexbox containers and flexbox items. Other > new box types in other specs might need to do the same. I think extending Chapter 3 with several sentences in this regard is what we need. So, similarly, you might want to amend # The first line of a table-cell or inline-block cannot be the first # formatted line of an ancestor element. Thus, in <DIV><P # STYLE="display: inline-block">Hello<BR>Goodbye</P> etcetera</DIV> # the first formatted line of the DIV is not the line "Hello". and # bidi-override # # For inline elements this creates an override. For block container # elements this creates an override for inline-level descendants not # within another block container element. (though I guess this one is already buggy with anonymous 'table-cell'.) . I think these are pretty much all the block container-related things last time I want to figure out if 'table' is a block container... Cheers, Kenny
Received on Sunday, 13 May 2012 10:42:16 UTC