- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 14:06:26 -0800
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 02/13/2014 03:29 AM, Peter Moulder wrote: > > §5.4: > > # exactly as if the flex items were reordered in the source document. > > If talking about behaving as if reordering the source document, then I think it > worthwhile to clarify that 'order' has no effect on counter values, e.g.: > > | However, 'order' has no effect on counter values. > > (Other places where one might consider mentioning counter values are sections > 9.1 and 5.4.1. My own conclusion was not to in each of these two cases.) Good point. I think we should start a top-level thread on this one, so I'll go do that. > §8.3: > > # A value of auto for 'align-self' > # computes to the value of 'align-items' on > - # the element's parent, > + # the flex item’s parent, > # or <a value for=align-self>stretch</a> if > - # the element > + # the flex item > # has no parent. > > This change should be reverted: the text in question is defining the computed > value of the 'align-self' property, which needs to be done whether or not the > element ultimately generates a flex-item box. (E.g. because "all properties > defined in this specification also accept the inherit keyword as their property > value.") Good catch. Fixed. > One other change included in this commit is changing a prose condition for the > over-constrained-aspect-ratio case to the form of an unordered list (and, > incidentally, changing the behaviour for that condition). In that unordered list > ("If the flex item has ..."), may I suggest adding semicolon after the first > item and "; and" after the second ? This just saves a bit of time working out > whether "and" or "or" is intended. Fixed. :) > That's all I noticed. Thanks for taking the time to fix these box generation > things; we're slowly working our way towards having the box tree being defined > in a way likely to be implemented interoperably. Thanks for your detailed review and commenting! These improvements wouldn't happen without it. ~fantasai and TJ
Received on Friday, 7 March 2014 22:06:53 UTC