W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2017

Re: [css-flexbox-1] Decision to make definiteness of flex items' main size depend on flex-basis's definiteness

From: Geoffrey Sneddon <me@gsnedders.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2017 14:35:42 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHKdfMiP8gFgmWfo9NR_xdLqP=WLbnD9qUWWRyKVDs3CTE-N7w@mail.gmail.com>
To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 6:32 AM, Geoffrey Sneddon <me@gsnedders.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I've been looking through a few non-interoperable parts of flexbox again
> recently, and have run into
> <https://codepen.io/gsnedders/pen/WRZQrx?editors=1100#0> again. Notably,
> Edge and Firefox both pass this test case, and Chrome and Safari fail.
> Except, as it turns out, the behaviour in Chrome and Safari is right.
> (Actually, the behaviour in Safari is wrong, it just happens to be right
> for that test case, but let's never mind details!)
> I can't work out is where the behaviour in Edge and Firefox comes from,
> though maybe it is down to interpretation of the spec prior to
> <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/commit/2f0ad00527a726c92a6567b210696142e8c2b722>
> and whether you need to measure content in this case? Though that
> doesn't seem true? I haven't dug too deep into this though!
> That said, what I'm really here to ask is when and why we decided to go
> with the behaviour the spec and Chrome now have and hence against the
> Edge/Firefox behaviour. This seems to be something that trips web
> authors up a fair bit (there's *lots* of bugs in the Chromium bug
> tracker about this!). Something to point people at as to, "hey, here's
> why the spec does this nowadays, and why we think this is better
> behaviour", ideally—though obviously a blog post summarising it may well
> be needed!
> /gsnedders

This is now <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1679>.

Received on Wednesday, 2 August 2017 12:36:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:15:04 UTC