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

Re: [css-flexbox] Intrinsic Cross Size Definition Totally Wrong

From: Christian Biesinger <cbiesinger@google.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 17:31:37 -0500
Message-ID: <CAPTJ0XFwSYuTm8HNj5NJ6HZa9wV152x=P2GcRD1okmMcoO6U0w@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Ojan Vafai <ojan@google.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 7:55 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 04:43 PM, fantasai wrote:
>> Side note: current browsers also set the *flex container’s* inner
>> size to that largest value, which is clearly wrong, as it is
>> guaranteed to cause overflow if there are multiple lines. We would
>> need to require the cross-size to be the sum of the line’s cross
>> sizes after doing item layout and linebreaking as outlined above.
> Note: IE does the correct behavior, wrapping the flex container
> around all of the columns. Edge preserves this behavior for
> max-content.
> It would be nice if implementations can align on intrinsic sizes
> of flex containers not causing their content to overflow. :) :) :)

Right, I somehow didn't think about this correctly, totally missing
the fact that the correct behavior requires doing layout in order to
compute the preferred width.

On behalf of Blink, I want to object to requiring any behavior that
requires layout in order to calculate the preferred width of a
container. So, I guess there's no good solution here :(

Received on Tuesday, 8 December 2015 22:32:25 UTC

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