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

Re: [css-flexbox] Understanding flexbox-flex-direction-column.htm

From: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 19:32:19 -0700
To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Cc: Christian Biesinger <cbiesinger@google.com>
message-id: <55121E33.30608@mozilla.com>
On 03/24/2015 06:44 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote:
> On 03/24/2015 06:26 PM, Christian Biesinger wrote:
>>> If the item’s computed flex-basis is definite, or the item’s computed flex-basis is content and its computed main size property is definite
[...]
> Stepping back: so, for that testcase to work, the spec needs to
> effectively say: "If you have a flex item with an explicit height &
> default flex properties, don't let its min-height:auto value resolve to
> anything larger than its explicit height."
> 
> So in the testcase, biesi linked to, where the div has explicit "height:
> 38px", the content doesn't matter -- its min-height:auto resolves to (at
> most) 38px.
> 
> I think the first half of this spec-sentence (RE the item's computed
> flex-basis) is trying to cover that case, but it doesn't quite cover it,
> because the item's computed flex-basis is actually "auto".  (which means
> we "retrieve" the height property and use that for the flex-basis. But
> the computed flex-basis is still auto, IIUC.)

Tab/fantasai, I think this spec-text might need a tweak.

As noted above, I think this spec-text might be assuming that
"flex-basis:auto" actually *computes* to the main-size property-value
(so that "computed flex-basis is definite" includes e.g.
flex-basis:auto;width:50px).

But I don't think that assumption holds up. It's not clearly specced
that way, at least -- and browsers seem to agree that "flex-basis:auto"
just computes to "auto", using this testcase which probes the computed
value via inheritance: http://jsfiddle.net/uxrtm0au/

So, I think this sentence might need s/computed/used/.
Or alternately, it might just need s/'content'/'content' or 'auto'/.

~Daniel
Received on Wednesday, 25 March 2015 02:32:51 UTC

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