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

Re: [css-flexbox] available space and max-height

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 17:09:36 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDswQHy=CDpPZFvefi2dzuVwFtrqEapbUF0vDWVVLFhow@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christian Biesinger <cbiesinger@google.com>
Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Christian Biesinger
<cbiesinger@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Christian Biesinger
>> <cbiesinger@google.com> wrote:
>>> However that still leaves the preferred width computation which only
>>> says "Place all flex items into lines of infinite length.", which is
>>> quite the opposite of respecting any height or max-height properties.
>>> Shouldn't it be affected by that?
>>
>> No, "width: max-content;" never cares about the "max-width" property
>> on the element.  (For the purpose of figuring out what "max-content"
>> resolves to - later, in actual layout, it of course matters.)
>
> No, that's not what I meant. This is still about how max-height should
> affect the max-content width. See the testcase I gave originally -- if
> a column flexbox has a max-height set, shouldn't the intrinsic width
> computation break the boxes into multiple lines and give a width that
> can fit the multiple flex rows (visually, the columns)?

Your testcase doesn't invoke max-content at all.  Your desired result
is what you get, yes, but from elsewhere in the algorithm, as fantasai
outlined.

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 2 December 2015 01:10:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:58 UTC