- From: Oriol Brufau via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 07 May 2019 22:48:09 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> The second bullet applies to row 1, and the first bullet applies to row 2 (since the "For intrinsic minimums" step handles base sizes). So it seems to me we should distribute to both rows So I guess you are saying that when multiple bullets apply, we should consider the union? With the "if there are no such tracks, then all affected tracks" happening at the end after doing the union. Like > - when handling base sizes: any affected track that happens to have either > - a `max-content` min and max track sizing functions, or > - a `min-content` or `auto` min track sizing function, and an intrinsic max track sizing function > > If there are no such tracks, then all affected tracks. > - when handling growth limits: all affected tracks. That would be clearer (and easy to implement in Chromium). > Yeah, I'm not sure what that paragraph is trying to say really. Maybe that any fit-content() track that reached its limit in step 2.2 should be excluded from 2.3? (In which case you'd get Chrome's layout I guess) Yes, that's my understanding too. It would match Edge instead of Chrome. When distributing "For intrinsic minimums", Chromium only applies the first bullet, i.e. only tracks matching `HasAutoOrMinContentMinTrackBreadthAndIntrinsicMaxTrackBreadth()` are allowed to grow beyond growth limits. This is the case for `fit-content(0)` or `auto` but not for `max-content`. -- GitHub Notification of comment by Loirooriol Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3621#issuecomment-490282192 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 7 May 2019 22:48:10 UTC