- 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