Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-sizing] Adding a 'size' shorthand for 'width'/'height'

The Working Group just discussed `Adding a 'size' shorthand for 'width'/'height'`, and agreed to the following resolutions:

* `RESOLVED: Add a note to the spec explaining this problem and move this issue to level 4`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic: Adding a 'size' shorthand for 'width'/'height'<br>
&lt;dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/820<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Shorthands are nice. We have them for many things, but not combo of width and height.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: We hadn't added that because there's a size property like thing that the app page has tht does not behave anything like this shorthand would. That sets the size of the writing box.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Options are do something wierd where size doesn't work for @page. Other option is some other word then size. "box-size" is the current issue in the suggestion.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: It would be for block-size and inline-size. min-box-size would be the other.<br>
&lt;dael> florian: Naming conflict is that bad?<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: It's a descriptor but operating on a box that accepts other boxes. It'll be weird forever.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Weird because page takes width and height and size should be a property there. Conflict itself is weird but especially in the exact case.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: box-sizing is close.<br>
&lt;dael> dbaron: box and block might be confused by some.<br>
&lt;tantek> indeed<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: What is the motivation here?<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: People want to set width and height together.<br>
&lt;dael> florian: When people want to says omething different they repeat themselves.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: It's likely you'll want both to a keyword like auto or 100% or contain.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Equal sizing is reasonable.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: The short shorthand is always going to give you squares.<br>
&lt;dael> florian: If you do % it will not.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Unless box-size 50% is same for height and width.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: If we didn't have a naming conflict this would be in the spec.<br>
&lt;dael> florian: I'd ignore the naming conflict and say you can't use it in @page rule<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: I don't like that because if you don't know anything about @page it's surprising.<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Here I've found I have to use it and the styles I set up perfectly are no longer good.<br>
&lt;dael> florian: It's the code you wrote to size the page that would be weird.<br>
&lt;fantasai> @page { size: 8.5in 11in; }<br>
&lt;dael> rune_: Page doesn't match any elements?<br>
&lt;dael> florian: no<br>
&lt;fantasai> @page { size: letter; }<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: I'm thinking copying from another container.<br>
&lt;dael> emilio: I think having a shorthand for page rule isn't worth it.<br>
&lt;dael> plinss: First comment TabAtkins said is people have been asking for this and it would be mildly useful. I'm not sure mildy is worth it.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: I've had people bug me for this. Those people are not sitting here.<br>
&lt;astearns> s/plinss/astearns/<br>
&lt;emilio> s/a shorthand/a special-case for @page rule/ above<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: I'm not hearing consensus on using size or another name. I'm not hearing huge enthusiasm for solving this<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Might be worth a note in the spec saying we've considered a shorthand and have not found enough motivation for dealing witht he problems and outline what the problems are.<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Objections?<br>
&lt;dael> RESOLVED: Add a note to the spec explaining this problem and move this issue to level 4<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/820#issuecomment-380107181 using your GitHub account

Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2018 13:55:57 UTC