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

Re: [css-flexbox] minor editorial nits

From: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 14:42:18 -0700
Message-ID: <537A7ABA.2040001@mozilla.com>
To: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 05/19/2014 02:19 PM, Alan Stearns wrote:
> It’s not so much about specified versus computed values. It’s about the
> lack of mention of the align-items property. I think this is the second
> time I’ve read through this and asked myself, “Why are we considering the
> individual flex item alignments now instead of the container’s
> align-items?” Perhaps that’s just me, though.

I think it's pretty clear, FWIW.

The spec doesn't actually bring up align-items very much (which I think
is a good thing).  All of its mentions are in a single chunk (the
property's definition), which says the following:

  # align-items sets the default alignment for all of the
  # flex container’s items, including anonymous flex
  # items.  align-self allows this default alignment to be
  # overridden for individual flex items.


That makes it pretty clear that align-items just sets the *default*
value of another property (and the other property is what matters &
influences the layout algorithm).

Received on Monday, 19 May 2014 21:42:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:42 UTC