- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 19:11:48 -0800
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 10:38 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk > <news@terrainformatica.com> wrote: >> So for horizontal inline-flex elements 'align-content:auto' >> shall mean 'align-content:baseline' if that element has >> vertical-align:baseline defined. >> >> No? > > No, it means what it says in the spec: > <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-align/#content-distribution> It's not the spec yet, right? > > # All values other than 'auto' force the block container to > # establish a new formatting context. ... 'auto' otherwise > # behaves as 'start'. > Forget for the second what is written in that proposal and take a look here: http://terrainformatica.com/w3/baseline-middle-align.png That horizontal container has align-content:center. (Or is it justify-content in this case?) Anyway, I mean alignment of children in vertical direction. And as you see, for inline-block/flex elements, combination { align-content:center; vertical-align:baseline; } makes no sense. Horizontal container with no baseline aligned children simply has no baseline practically speaking. Nothing to align to. And that was my point. That vertical-align dualism of element-itself / element-content only arises for inline-block/table-cell/flex/grid/table/etc. cases. For elements out of inline contexts so for display:block/flex/etc. vertical-align can be treated as content alignment. And so we can avoid that alignments carnival. -- Andrew Fedoniouk. http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2014 03:12:17 UTC