- From: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 18:55:15 -0700
- To: Greg Whitworth <gwhit@microsoft.com>
- Cc: John Kreitlow <john.kreitlow@gmail.com>, Christian Biesinger <cbiesinger@google.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CANMdWTt1wabPJzEM8GWBtxJMZphL0rTy+G0pQwMnEwsHwqVkSg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Greg Whitworth <gwhit@microsoft.com> wrote: > > I made this codepen to outline the case: > http://codepen.io/radium-v/pen/ropFz > > The example works as I'd expect in Chrome 34, IE11, and Safari 7 - but > it unfortunately breaks in Firefox 28 (Daniel suggests the opposite though, > that FF > > exhibits the correct behavior while the other browsers fail to match the > spec). > > It seems to me that the paragraph from the spec is intended for > single-line flex containers. It doesn't take into account how multi-line > containers > > should behave, especially their dimensions aren't explicitly defined. > > There's some more detail regarding this section of the spec found here > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Mar/0688.html > > I'm in favor of changing things here - it shouldn't be assumed that a > flex container is more likely to be given an explicit height, since it's > not assumed in most other cases. > > Those are all valid points, but we would prefer Grid and Flex being > consistent with one another and resolving these values in the same manner. > Because of that, we are in favor of IE and Chrome updating their > implementations to match Gecko and the spec. I do think you bring up an > interesting use case and would love to see us address it since authors will > undoubtedly hit it. > I agree that grid and flex should be consistent, but disagree with your conclusion. > I do like Tabs idea of a property because then there is no confusion to > the author as to what they are selecting to resolve against. I also think > that resolving padding-top against the width is similarly confusing to > authors and we shouldn’t repeat that (I understand why they chose that for > flows) but for a long time I always assumed that it _WAS_ resolved against > the height. > Yes it's confusing and weird. If I were designing the platform from scratch, I would just disallow percentage height/padding entirely. But, making flexbox/grid be different than every other display type just adds to the confusion. If there were significant use-cases that we couldn't meet with percentage paddings resolving against the width, then it might be worth reconsidering, but I have yet to see compelling use-cases and have seen bugs from web developers where they want the resolve-against-width behavior. In the time we've been shipping flexbox, we've never once gotten a bug filed where someone wanted to have percentage paddings resolve against height.
Received on Friday, 18 April 2014 01:56:04 UTC