W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2014

Re: [css-flexbox] What to do with an item's height when max-height is applied to the flex container

From: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 12:58:37 -0700
Message-ID: <5355786D.3030205@mozilla.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Greg Whitworth <gwhit@microsoft.com>
CC: fantasai <fantasai@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
I agree that this is unambiguous, and that the Firefox / IE behavior
matches what the spec calls for. (and Blink needs fixing on this.)

The only ambiguous part, to me, is "do we like the Blink behavior
better". :)  I kind of like it, as a logical extension of the special
case in Step 8.

If we do prefer the Blink behavior, we could extend Step 8 to say
something like this, at the end of the "Otherwise" prose:

  If the flex container has only one flex line (even if it's
  a multi-line flex container), then clamp the line's cross-size
  to be within the container's computed min and max cross-size

This would be a trivial change to implement, and I'd be fine if we
decided to change the spec along these lines. (I don't feel strongly
about it, though.)


On 04/21/2014 12:50 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Greg Whitworth <gwhit@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> We ran into an interesting interop issue where if you set a flex container
>> with a max-height, Firefox and IE set the flex-item height to the height of
>> the max-content of the items, while Chrome sets the max-height of the
>> flex-item to the suggested max-height applied to the flex-container. The
>> spec is not completely clear on what to do in this case so I would like to
>> reach consensus on what to do in this case:
>> A)     Have the flex items inherit their height from the flex-container’s
>> constraints if not directly set (Chrome)
>> B)      Resolve their height against the largest flex-item (IE, Firefox)
>> Here is a fiddle of the repro:
>> http://jsfiddle.net/VDq6r/6/
> Can you point out what part of the spec seems ambiguous on this point?
>  It seems clear to me:
> 1. In step 8, the flex container's cross size is indefinite, so we
> can't use the first clause.  We fall to the second one, which sizes
> the flex line to the largest hypothetical cross size among its items
> (150px).
> 2. In step 11, the flex item is stretched and auto-sized and meets the
> other criteria, so it gets set to the size of the flex line (150px).
> 3. In step 15, the flex container is set to the size of its flex line
> (150px), but clamped by its min/max properties, so it gets set to
> 100px. (This is FF's behavior, and probably IE's from your
> description.)
> Is there something I've missed that makes this less cut-and-dry?
> ~TJ
Received on Monday, 21 April 2014 19:59:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:39 UTC