W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2013

Re: [css-flexbox] "flex: 1;" does the wrong thing in min-size constraint sizing

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 18:30:17 -0700
Message-ID: <51E896A9.3050009@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 05/14/2013 05:30 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote:
> On 05/14/2013 04:44 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote:
>> On 05/14/2013 11:12 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>> Proposed solution: we add a new value, provisionally named
>>> "dont-shrink-me-bro"
> [...]
>>>   This becomes the new value for
>>> 'flex-basis' when it's omitted from the shorthand
>> Isn't "0%" exactly the dont-shrink-me-bro value that you're looking for?
> Aside: the flexbox spec actually used to have 0% as the default
> flex-basis value in the flex shorthand, but it this default changed from
> "0%" to "the length zero" in this commit from August:
>    https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/rev/b2a41fac8bd9#l2.71
> At first I thought it might've been a mistake (since the commit message
> sounds like it wasn't intending to change meaning), but I don't think it
> was a mistake, because the next changeset replaced "0%" with "0px" in a
> several other places, e.g.:
>     https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/rev/4e1547aca385#l1.127
> fantasai or Tab, do you happen to recall the reason for that change?  (I
> searched my www-style archive for "flex-basis", but I couldn't find
> anything related, in the timeframe of those commits.)

I honestly can't remember the reason for that change. Probably some
internal discussion between me and Tab, though I don't recall whether
it was intended to be substantive or editorial.

Received on Friday, 19 July 2013 01:30:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:32 UTC