[css3-flexbox] Bad result in flex algorithm when combining stretch, and elements with an aspect ratio from Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu on 2012-12-04 (www-style@w3.org from December 2012) (original) (raw)

(12/12/04 4:27), Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

I've gotten private feedback from Ojan & Tony that they're fine with these additions, and I think this matches IE's behavior. If I don't get any objections from one of the other browsers, I'll put this into the spec in a few days.

Are there test cases showing that IE is indeed doing this? My test[1] unexpectedly shows the contrary in IE10 (and so I can't do further testing with my comments below). Chrome and Opera 12.10 give stretched images, as expected.

We've made the change in (1) above, and just added a note rather than making the change in (2), as fantasai is sure that it won't actually have an effect if you follow the steps properly: <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-flexbox/#hypothetical-main-size> (third bullet point in the linked step).

which is this paragraph:

If the flex basis and cross size are both ‘auto’ , the flex

container is single-line and has a definite cross size, the flex

item has an intrinsic aspect ratio, and the flex item has

‘align-self: stretch’, the flex base size is computed from the

flex container's inner cross size and the flex item's intrinsic

aspect ratio.

Can we get some review that this works, and that it matches the current IE behavior?

Is it intentional that the flex base size computation here ignores min/max constraint (say, 'min/max-height') on the flex item with intrinsic aspect ratio? Say, something like this

(Note that this is different from another question of mine which has to do with the flexing algorithm.)

This extra substep overall seems somewhat inconsistent and looks like a hack to me but I am fine as long as browsers vendors are willing to follow the spec literally. But I'd hope Web developers show support for this.

[1] http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?saved=1981

Cheers, Kenny

Web Specialist, Oupeng Browser, Beijing Try Oupeng: http://www.oupeng.com/

Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2012 09:04:15 UTC