On 04/04/2016 01:57 PM, fantasai wrote: > (Fwiw, we did clarify that if an item with a definite flex basis > is inflexible, it is considered definite. [1]) > [1] https://hg.csswg.org/drafts/rev/fbcbe170c119 Two concerns about this -- so, the new language here is: # Note: An inflexible item with a definite flex basis # is, by definition, definite. CONCERN #1: "definite" is a term that applies to lengths, not to items. So, the "item ... is ... definite" language doesn't make any sense here. This really wants to say that the item's main size is definite, I think? CONCERN #2: This Note might need to be promoted to an actual listed case here (alongside the other flex-specific special cases for "definite"). I don't think it's covered by any of the other cases, nor is it covered by the CSS3-SIZING definition of "definite". (please correct me if I'm missing the language that covers it, though).
Received on Monday, 4 April 2016 21:23:33 UTC
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4