- From: davidsgrogan via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 21:05:59 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Are you sure that was the resolution? Maybe I'm looking in the wrong place but I found these: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/94 https://log.csswg.org/irc.w3.org/css/2016-07-27/#e708168 Then the end of https://drafts.csswg.org/css-values/#calc-computed-value says mix-unit calc expressions in table parts may be treated as auto. I guess the part of the spec I quoted up top is defining the behavior for implementations that don't treat them as auto. And from the sizing-type definition in https://drafts.csswg.org/css-tables-3/#width-distribution-algorithm, I see that calc values would fall under the auto-column definition, so maybe that answers my question about how is this different than auto width distribution: auto tables treat calc widths as auto and fixed tables can treat them as auto or resolve them against the table width? -- GitHub Notification of comment by davidsgrogan Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1688#issuecomment-326420598 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 31 August 2017 21:05:56 UTC