- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 15:11:53 -0800
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 09/17/2014 09:26 AM, François REMY wrote: >> Why not? Assume that the two columns are just >> 1fr and 9fr, no min size, and the first column has >> an item that's 100px wide. You'd expect the grid >> to be 1000px wide then, right? Fundamentally, >> Grid tries to reverse the flex relationships to >> preserve the intention; this is a bit different from >> Flexbox. > > Okay. That is not what I thought to be natural, but I can understand the reasoning. Actually, Flexbox does this as well. See the definition of max-content size for flex containers: http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-flexbox/#intrinsic-sizes (This is a relatively recent update; we noticed the error in the last cycle. But think if we didn't calculate it this way, the flex container would size itself to 100px and then only 10px would be allocated to the 100px item, and that's bad.) ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 18 December 2014 23:12:22 UTC