Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[css-flexbox-1] Fragmentation rules around break propagation are confusingly-written #2614

fantasai opened this issue Apr 26, 2018 · 3 comments


Copy link


@fantasai fantasai added the css-flexbox-1 Current Work label Apr 26, 2018
fantasai added a commit that referenced this issue May 2, 2018
…ccur for out-of-flows, that it doesn't affect computed values, and that it uses order-modified document order. #2614
@fantasai fantasai added the css-break-3 Current Work label May 2, 2018
Copy link
Collaborator Author

fantasai commented May 2, 2018

OK, I made some clarifications to Fragmentation and to Flexbox, specifically, pulled out break propagation into its own section into css-break-3 and clarified that:

  • out-of-flows don't propagate their break values up to their parents
  • layout modes like Flexbox and Grid have more specific propagation rules which override the one in css-break-3
  • Flexbox uses order-modified document order in determining first/last child

Agenda+ since this has normative implications

fergald pushed a commit to fergald/csswg-drafts that referenced this issue May 7, 2018
…ccur for out-of-flows, that it doesn't affect computed values, and that it uses order-modified document order. w3c#2614
Copy link

@fantasai With regards to flex change specifically - this is how I understood the previous spec text to work so no argument from me. I think the clarity provide by this change will make it much more approachable by anyone; so, it's a good improvement. Finally, the addition of the note regarding the computed value clarifies the confusion the test author had. Thanks for doing this.

Copy link

The Working Group just discussed Fragmentation rules around break propagation are confusingly-written, and agreed to the following:

  • RESOLVED: Accept changes in
The full IRC log of that discussion <dael> Topic: Fragmentation rules around break propagation are confusingly-written
<dael> github:
<rego> no she sent regrets
<dael> Rossen_: Summary: There were some comments made about fragmentation rules not being clear, esp with child/parent break propagation. Changes added to css break were intended to address this.
<dael> Rossen_: [reads 2st clarification] makes sense because out of flow items proagate to containing block.
<dael> Rossen_: 2nd is flex and grid layout have specific prop rules that override css 3 break. That was in tune to previous since we've extended fragmentation before and assume that overrides, but now that's explicit
<dael> Rossen_: Last is flexbox....i think grid...order is modified and prop is based on layout order, not doc order.
<dael> Rossen_: These are the changes. Issue was on the agenda to either accept or challenge the changes.
<dael> Rossen_: From the 3 changes, as I said, 2 are mostly editorial. 1st is out of flows don't prop their break...that can be seen as normative
<dael> Rossen_: Opinions? Questions? Reasons not to accept?
<dael> Rossen_: I'll take silence as no. Obj to accept changes in ?
<dbaron> I think it's probably fine, but I think out-of-flows might be a *little* interesting, maybe?
<dael> RESOLVED: Accept changes in
<dael> dbaron: I think it's fine

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet

No branches or pull requests

4 participants