- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 May 2015 16:26:00 -0700
- To: Christian Biesinger <cbiesinger@google.com>
- Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Christian Biesinger <cbiesinger@google.com> wrote: > On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 6:45 PM, Christian Biesinger > <cbiesinger@google.com> wrote: >> On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 7:57 PM, Christian Biesinger >> <cbiesinger@google.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 5:19 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: >>>> Let me know if that addresses your concern. >>> >>> Yes... it does. (As a sidenote, why is flex-basis: available not >>> definite? http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox/#definite) >> >> After re-reading, there is another part here that requires layout to >> calculate the intrinsic size, I think: >> "3. Add each item’s flex basis [...]" >> >> The flex basis here may require layout, right? (flex-basis: content) > > Or maybe flex basis should say "flex base size"...? "flex basis" is just the 'flex-basis', or the 'width'/'height'. "flex base size" is the one more likely to require layout; it's the value calculated by 9.2.3 and then clamped to get the hypothetical main size. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 6 May 2015 23:26:50 UTC