W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2014

[css-flexbox] CR Disposition of Comments

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 01:07:20 -0700
Message-ID: <5326AD38.10502@inkedblade.net>
To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
Hi everyone!
Tab and I finished going through the spec changes and DoC
since CR. Everything is now diff-marked in the changes
section and cross-referenced to the DoC. We've also closed
off all the issues except those that require some WG review.

Changes section:
   http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/#changes
Disposition of Comments:
   http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/issues-cr-2012

*ISSUE 19*

There is a *major* issue open on the handling of flex item
minimum sizes. You can see the dueling changesets at the
top of the changes list. :) This is Issue 19 in the DoC.
   http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/issues-cr-2012#issue-19
which was raised in response to the changes from Issue 17.
   http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/issues-cr-2012#issue-19
The editors (me, Tab, Rossen) recommend resolving to take
Alex Mogilevsky's proposal to resolve Elliot's feedback:
that would be the second set of changes, redefining 'auto'
to be a little more automagic. See analysis at
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jul/0456.html
We tested IE11, and found that it already implements the
overflow-dependence in the proposal, so there is precedent.

*ISSUE 3*

Issue 3 is about handling percentage children of flex *items*.
There are two sets of changes that are required to handle this:

   a) Make stretched items in single-line flex items propagate
      "definiteness" of the flex container.
      So if a flex container has a definite cross-size, a
      stretched item is also considered to have a definite
      cross size, and its percentage children can resolve
      their sizes.
      We have a WG resolution on this part.

   b) Calculate a definite cross-size for auto-height flex
      containers by pretending percentage-height children
      are auto-height, and then redoing layout based on
      that flex container height.
      So if a row container is auto-height, we calculate a
      height based on its contents (as normal), but then if
      there are percentage-height children in its flex items,
      they get sized based on the row container's auto-height.
      This results in weird layout in some cases (mainly, if
      a non-100% child is the one defining the height of the
      flex container), but allows for better content-fitting
      in other cases.
      Note: IE implements this logic.
      We do not have a WG resolution on this part, and would
      like feedback from the WG and Flexbox implementors.

http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/issues-cr-2012#issue-3

*OTHER*

Issue 32 asks if 'float' should compute to 'none' on flex items.
We closed it no change, but would like to hear back from other
members of the WG in case there are reasons to do otherwise.
(We didn't have strong reasoning one way or the other.)
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/issues-cr-2012#issue-32

Issue 33 asks if 'order' affects counters.
In this case, a reason to not make the change is that 'order'
is supposed to be purely visual (otherwise, source order should
be changed), and counters are also part of speech display. We
closed it no change, but are open to feedback.
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/issues-cr-2012#issue-33

Thanks for your attention~~~

~fantasai
Received on Monday, 17 March 2014 08:07:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:20 UTC