- From: Christian Biesinger <cbiesinger@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 20:23:29 -0400
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
Received on Friday, 22 August 2014 00:23:56 UTC
Hi Tab, On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Christian Biesinger > <cbiesinger@google.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > so I saw that the flex box spec requires that a descendant of a flex item > > with percentage height gets resolved against the flex item's actual > height: > > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox/#algo-stretch > > > > I was wondering why that is? This is inconsistent with every other use of > > percentages, and requires multi-pass layout (ie. is slow). > > I'd have to dig for the archeology of the change, but it was meant to > directly address author feedback on it being confusing. Note that > there's no need to do multi-pass layout if the flexbox's cross size is > definite and it's single-line, as you know the size of the line > automatically then. > > I find it surprising that this behavior is less confusing. Why do authors want this behavior in this one place in the platform? Why only for stretch? Anyway, point taken. thanks, -christian
Received on Friday, 22 August 2014 00:23:56 UTC