- From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 13:53:33 -0700
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: W3C WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
On 6/26/13 1:37 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> wrote: >> See the regions/flexbox thread from today [1]. You and I have different >> opinions on what happens when. >> >> When I say that the result of the regions processing model provides an >> input to the flex layout algorithm, I mean the *entire* regions >>processing >> model. You're picking out an answer from the middle. > >Ah, I see I was misreading the region algorithm. It's confusing, >because you resolve height, like, 3 times. > >Still, the effect of 'stretch' is very limited. It only shrinks >things if the flexbox has a single line, and a definite cross size. >You can treat that equivalently to an additional min and max height >constraint. > >~TJ Ah, you're right that the shrinking only happens with a definite cross size. Since that can be used as a constraint in the regions processing model, that means you'll never get an answer for an auto-height region flex item that is taller than the cross size. I'd figured that out a few days ago, then forgot it today. So the shrinkiness of stretch isn't a problem for regions. I still think it's weird, though. Thanks! Alan
Received on Wednesday, 26 June 2013 20:54:06 UTC