- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 17:07:57 -0500
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 08/31/2015 06:34 PM, fantasai wrote: > In <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2015Jun/0085.html> > timeless mentioned that, in the cases where there are no explicitly > baseline-aligned items, it would make more sense to use the main-axis > baseline of the first item that has a baseline, rather than using the > baseline of the first item if it has one and then falling back to the > bottom of its content box. > > I'm not sure this is necessary, since I'd imagine that in most cases > if you wanted to align to the baseline of the flex container's contents, > you'd also have requested baseline alignment of said contents. > > In any case, thoughts? > > Option A (current text): > 1. Use shared baseline of baseline-aligned items > 2. Use baseline of first item > 3. Synthesize baseline from content box of first item > (if first item doesn't have a baseline) > > Option B (proposed): > 1. Use shared baseline of baseline-aligned items > 2. Use baseline of first item that has a base line > 3. Synthesize baseline from content box of first item > (if no items in that row/column have a real baseline). > > I lean towards A because it means we don't have to treat synthesized > and real baselines differently as we walk up the tree. > > But I can also see that it would be confusing to baseline-align to > the bottom of a first item that's an image when the second item has > text. > > Note that given A, the author can still achieve this result by > requesting baseline alignment for the second item. But they'd have > to do that explicitly -- which will give better results when there > are multiple items, but may not be as intuitive otherwise. Just to close on this, the WG chose Option A (no change). https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2015Sep/0064.html ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 3 December 2015 22:08:33 UTC