- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 15:13:45 -0800
- To: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com> wrote: > Hi www-style, > > Question: Should a flex container honor "overflow:[scroll,hidden,auto]"? > > >From my reading of the spec, I think the answer is "no -- overflow > should have no effect on a flex container". But the implementations in > Chrome dev channel & Opera 12.12 seem to disagree with me, so I figured > I'd get clarification and see if I'm missing something. > > Here's a testcase, FWIW: > https://people.mozilla.com/~dholbert/tests/flexbox/compat_tests/flex-container-overflow-scroll.html > > My reasoning for why "overflow" should have no effect: > (a) The property definition specifically targets "block container > elements": > # This property specifies whether content of a > # block container element is clipped when it > # overflows the element's box > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visufx.html#overflow > > (b) The flexbox spec explicitly says: > # Flex containers are not block containers > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-flexbox/#flex-containers > > So, combining (a) and (b): "overflow" specifies something about block > container elements, and flex containers are not block containers -- > hence, overflow should *not* apply to flex containers. > > Am I missing something? > > (Whichever behavior is determined to be correct, this could probably > stand to be clarified in the flexbox spec.) Overflow definitely needs to apply, imo. The fact that it technically doesn't per spec is a result of CSS 2.1 being way too willing to assign qualities to "block containers", but then making "block containers" to specific to apply to anything but "display:block;". ~TJ
Received on Friday, 25 January 2013 23:14:32 UTC