Absolutely position children of flexbox behave different from v51 to v52
Reported by
ysa...@gmail.com,
Jun 10 2016
|
||
Issue descriptionUserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_9_5) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/52.0.2743.33 Safari/537.36 Example URL: https://jsbin.com/wuroje/edit?html,css,output Steps to reproduce the problem: 1. Create a flexbox with two children 2. Set position=absolute on the second child 3. See example above What is the expected behavior? The previous behavior (in v51 and current behavior of Firefox) is to have both children participate in flex layout. The new behavior is to exclude it. I don't know whether this is expected, because from reading https://www.w3.org/TR/css-flexbox-1/#abspos-items it would seem that absolutely positioned children of flexbox should not participate. However, the new absolute position is different from the static position, which seems to be against the W3 recommendation. Again, not certain whether this is new but expected behavior and looking for some guidance or clarity (or both). What went wrong? Absolutely position children of flexbox no longer participate in the layout. Does it occur on multiple sites: Yes Is it a problem with a plugin? No Did this work before? Yes v51 Does this work in other browsers? Yes Chrome version: 52.0.2743.33 Channel: beta OS Version: OS X 10.9.5 Flash Version:
,
Jun 10 2016
I'm not sure why you say their position is different from the static position. The spec you quoted defines what the static position is: "The static position of an absolutely-positioned child of a flex container is determined such that the child is positioned as if it were the sole flex item in the flex container, assuming both the child and the flex container were fixed-size boxes of their used size" We follow that. See also https://www.chromestatus.com/feature/6600926009753600. Note that MS Edge renders the same way, and Firefox will soon.
,
Jun 10 2016
If you want something like the previous behavior, you can try specifying "width: 0;" (and use the default overflow value of visible)
,
Jun 11 2016
Ah, thanks for pointing me in the right direction. It makes sense according to the spec and I didn't realize there was a feature for it on chromestatus. |
||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
||
Comment 1 by ysa...@gmail.com
, Jun 10 20168.4 KB
8.4 KB View Download
7.9 KB
7.9 KB View Download