W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2015

Re: [css-align] Definition of align-self inconsistent with css-flexbox for abspos

From: Javier Fernandez <jfernandez@igalia.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 00:18:12 +0200
Message-ID: <5526FAA4.3080800@igalia.com>
To: www-style@w3.org
Hi,

On 04/09/2015 08:41 PM, Christian Biesinger wrote:
> It says:
> "The auto keyword is equivalent to start on replaced
> absolutely-positioned boxes, and equivalent to stretch on all other
> absolutely-positioned boxes. (This is because CSS 2.1 does not stretch
> replaced elements to fit into fixed offsets.)"
> 

I think that definition is how 'auto', the computed value of 'auto' for
absolute-positioned boxes, should behave.

The spec states the following:

 "The auto keyword computes to itself on absolutely-positioned elements
and to the computed value of justify-items on the parent (minus any
legacy keywords) on all other boxes, or start if the box has no parent."

Then, 'auto' behavior, only valid for Absolute Positioned Boxes, depends
on many factors as it was commented above.

> However, in flexbox we have:
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox/#propdef-align-self
> "Computed value:auto computes to parent’s align-items value; otherwise
> as specified"

I only see the case of no parent, which Alignment spec resolves to 'start'.

> Separately, the prose in css-align never does specify what the
> *computed* value is for auto. It says what auto is equivalent to, but
> is not clear on whether that affects the computed value or not.
> 

I think it does, if I've understood it right.

--
javi
Received on Thursday, 9 April 2015 22:18:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:30 UTC