On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 7:03 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk <ne...@terrainformatica.com> wrote:

No. The rules in that section describe how to size and position an absolutely positioned element based on the values of its margin, padding, border and content size properties. Those rules do not consider flexunit values. You need to explain how the rules are extended to handle flexunit values. Are they just treated as auto?

That's confusing. In CSS all rendered elements create boxes. Your explanation that 'flow' only applies to elements that are block-inside makes more sense.

Hang on, you just said that 'flow' only applies to elements with block layout inside, so why does it make sense to apply flex units to table-cell?

But padding does work for inline elements, so one might expect flexunits padding to work on them too. In fact here http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Jun/0043.html I asked a question that assumed inline elements could have flex padding and you agreed.

I mean, given <div style="flow:vertical; position:relative; height:200px; overflow:auto;"> Hello <div style="margin:1*; position:absolute;"></div> Kitty </div> The position of the inner div is computed "assuming it was in the flow" according to CSS2.1. Does that mean you have to compute the space that would be assigned to the flex margin if the inner div was in-flow?

element doesn't have flexunits on it.

By the way, you probably should have a close look at your decision to make block descendants of an element with 'flow' all block formatting contexts. That means that margin collapsing never happens across the boundaries of these blocks, so the discussion we had earlier about margin-collapsing and flex-units is moot. That's probably a good step but apparently that's not what you've implemented. You probably should also work out more precisely what you mean by that restriction to make it clear exactly which blocks are affected and how.

I hope I've convinced you by now that there is a lot that a flexunits spec needs to say, and what it should say is not all obvious.

Rob