- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 17:09:36 -0800
- 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