- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 08:16:07 -0800
- To: Javier Fernandez <jfernandez@igalia.com>
- Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 2:38 AM, Javier Fernandez <jfernandez@igalia.com> wrote: > On 12/17/2014 04:22 AM, fantasai wrote: >>> So, do we want to allow, even if useless, the combination of 'stretch' >>> and <overflow-position> ? >> >> I don't think so, and I think the structure of the spec should be to >> have 'stretch' as one of the <content-distribution> values only, and >> to be explicitly listed as an alternative to 'auto' and <baseline-position> >> in the *-self properties. > > I don't agree on having 'stretch' just for <content-distribution> > because it makes sense to have such behavior for grid items. That's not what she's suggesting; she's saying to move 'stretch' out of the <item-position> production, back to the *-self properties as a special keyword. That way we can make it so that it's impossible to combine with safe/true. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 17 December 2014 16:16:55 UTC