- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
- Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 20:28:27 +0100
- To: MURAKAMI Shinyu <murakami@antenna.co.jp>
- CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Michael Day <mikeday@yeslogic.com>, Peter Moulder <peter.moulder@monash.edu>, WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
Le 25/11/2012 19:36, MURAKAMI Shinyu a écrit : > Seems almost good, > but found a typo s/note generated/not generated/ Fixed, thanks. > and I have one question: > > I think it is better not using min-content when the sum of outer > max-content is less than or equal to max box width (i.e., no line > wrapping necessary). In such case the used width should be > proportional to the respective outer max-content. In most cases of > page headers and footers, line wrapping is not often necessary and > calculating min-content is also unnecessary. I’m really not sure of the details of distributing space "proportionally to content". I just picked something so be improved on. I’m neutral on this change, but why do you want it? Is it because the results would be more aesthetic pleasing, or because of performance concerns in calculating min-content? In such cases the content would be short, so min-content would be quick to calculate. Also, the page size and headers typically do not change across pages, so layout results could be re-used. For these reasons I don’t think that performance is a strong argument. I’d rather not add more cases in the algorithm (which is complicated already), but I could still be convinced. What do you think of the balancing formula in other situations? (When some line wrapping or overflow is necessary.) -- Simon Sapin
Received on Sunday, 25 November 2012 19:29:06 UTC