[css-flexbox] Update DoC

Author: fantasai

css-flexbox/issues-cr-20160526.bsi

@@ -22,7 +22,9 @@ Response: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016Jun/0123.html
 Response: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016Jun/0124.html
 Response: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016Jun/0125.html
 Open:     Rejected
-Notes:    See previous discussions on a11y vs layout reordering and
+Notes:    See previous discussions on a11y vs layout reordering e.g.
+          https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2015Aug/0347.html
+          and
           https://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox/#flow-order
           https://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox/#order-accessibility
 Resolved: =WG= Discuss.
@@ -57,7 +59,7 @@ Summary:  Definiteness of flex items’ main size depending on flex-basis
 From:     Geoffrey Sneddon
 Comment:  https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2017Jan/0068.html
 Response: 
-Open:     =WG= Discuss.
+Open:     =dholbert= =Rossen= Comment. =WG= Discuss.
 ----
 Issue 7.
 Summary:  Spec lists incorrect initial value for 'flex'
@@ -136,7 +138,7 @@ Issue 15.
 Summary:  Absolute ratio flex impossible with margins/padding
 From:     fantasai
 Comment:  https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/316
-Open:     =WG= Discuss.
+Open:     =dholbert= =Rossen= =biesi= Comment. =WG= Discuss.
 ----
 Issue 16A.
 Summary:  Baselines of empty boxes and other cases of baseline synthesis
@@ -167,7 +169,10 @@ Issue 18.
 Summary:  Static position not following hypothetical position loses use cases
 From:     jlukic
 Comment:  https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/401
-Open:     =WG= Discuss.
+Response: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/401#issuecomment-286486848
+Response: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/401#issuecomment-288471456
+Closed:   Objection
+Resolved: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2017Mar/0072.html
 ----
 Issue 19A.
 Summary:  Computing out align-self auto is problematic
@@ -248,4 +253,3 @@ Response: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/995#issuecomment-282100035
 Closed:   Accepted
 Resolved: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2017Mar/0001.html
 ----
-