- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 12:01:25 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 05/07/2014 11:16 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > Right now 'flex-basis' has its computed value defined as "as > specified, with lengths made absolute". This implies that > "flex-basis: auto" (which means "use the value of width/height") stays > as "auto" in the computed value, and it's not well-defined when this > changes into the width/height value. > > fantasai and I propose that we define that "flex-basis: auto" computes > to the width/height value. Rossen concurred in a private discussion. > > This has some implications, which we think are acceptable. In > particular, it means that if a flex item has "flex-basis: auto", and > it's also a flexbox and has a child with "flex-basis: inherit;", the > child won't inherit the "auto" value - it will instead inherit the > width/height value that "auto" computes to. (Which might be "auto"! > ^_^) Use of "flex-basis: inherit;" is likely to be so rare that the > confusion this might cause is irrelevant, however. Even more info: Here's the start of the old discussion, which resulted in the current text: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Jun/0029.html This is tracked in the current DoC as Issue 13 http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/issues-lc-20140325#issue-13 ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 7 May 2014 19:01:52 UTC