Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-sizing] Intrinsic size of replaced elements incorrect

The CSS Working Group just discussed `Intrinsic size of replaced elements incorrect`, and agreed to the following resolutions:

* `RESOLVED: Close the issue`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic: Intrinsic size of replaced elements incorrect<br>
&lt;dael> github topic https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/794<br>
&lt;dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/794<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: There's a definition in the sizing spec about what the min and max content size of images are. We defined to account for sizing constriant in opposite axis. We're defining by reference to css 2.1<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: dbaron wanted these keywords to represent actual intrinisic size. I spoke with him and he said givent he way impl behave in grid he's unhappy about defining it that way be is okay. As far as the definition dbaron wants we can add another set of keywords if authors want to express that.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Seems unlikely as an author want, but might be useful for Houdini things.<br>
&lt;dael> dbaron: I think that's a reasonable summary.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: If everyone is happy with the state we can close as we've defined the sizing.<br>
&lt;dael> Chris: Objections?<br>
&lt;dael> Chris: Anyone need time to think?<br>
&lt;dael> RESOLVED: Close the issue<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/794#issuecomment-322821509 using your GitHub account

Received on Wednesday, 16 August 2017 16:09:59 UTC