Re: [css-flexbox] [css-align] unprefixing alignment properties before css-align

>>> But before I do that, I wanted to hear opinions about shipping the
>>> align-*/justify-* properties before we implement the full css-align
>>> spec. For example, conceivably, web authors will write code like:
>>>
>>>   * { justify-content: center; }
>>>
>>> And for now it will only apply to flexbox, but once we implement
>>> css-align, it would start applying to all blocks and mess up layouts.
>>>
>>>
>>> Now personally, I think that risk is somewhat low and people can just
>>> fix their sites, but does anyone have other opinions on this?
>>
>> I think it's acceptable, and we're planning to have Alignment finished
>> in the near future anyway.
>
> FWIW our concerns were that there seem to be a mismatch between the
> stability of Flexbox and Alignment. The Flexbox specification doesn't
> depends on Alignment explicitly [1] but from an implementer's
> perspective, because they share the same CSS properties, we have to be
> careful with unprefixing before Alignment has enough maturity as they
> are already exposed to the web.

Actually I would rather see the specification mature before we
unprefix these properties for several reasons:

* align-self has 2 incompatible grammars:
Alignment: auto | [ baseline | head | foot | center | stretch ] && true?
Flexbox: auto | flex-start | flex-end | center | baseline | stretch

* The 'true' value is just weird and would be better named something
more revealing (e.g. force-positioning)

* Some properties with the same values (e.g. align-self: auto,
justify-self: auto) have different behaviors based on the type of
elements it applies to. This is going to cause confusion when using
these properties and values.

* justify-self: auto on grid items just stretches the items. I find
this weird and I have a hard time understanding what's the use case
for it: width: auto (the default) gives you the stretch behavior
already.

Julien