W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > July 2018

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-text] Percentage of 'text-indent' against intrinsically sized box?

From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:54:13 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-406001183-1531932852-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
The Working Group just discussed `Percentage of 'text-indent' against intrinsically sized box?`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: Handle % text-indent in intrinsic size box same as % in padding and margin`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic: Percentage of 'text-indent' against intrinsically sized box?<br>
&lt;dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1597<br>
&lt;dael> florian: Had previous discussion about text-indent and % and we resolved which element to resolve % againt. Not that discussion. This is what do we do when intrinisic sizing. If indent grows the size and depends on the size we've got a loop<br>
&lt;dael> florian: I think we got close to consensus but ran out of time. I remember that no one had a use case for % text-indent on an intrinsic size thing so easiest is to say % resolves to 0 and there's no loop.<br>
&lt;dael> florian: Alt is min-content. That works for me too. I don't think this is use case driven<br>
&lt;Rossen_> q+<br>
&lt;dael> florian: Only thing to push us toward not-0 is people might want large negative % to hide stuff. DUnno if done much with text-indent. So I'd go with 0, but min-content is okay<br>
&lt;Rossen_> +1 to 0-<br>
&lt;astearns> ack dbaron<br>
&lt;fantasai> http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?%3C!DOCTYPE%20html%3E%0A%3Cdiv%20style%3D%22float%3A%20left%3B%20border%3A%20solid%3B%20text-indent%3A%2050%25%22%3EThis%20is%20a%20test<br>
&lt;Rossen_> q_<br>
&lt;Rossen_> q-<br>
&lt;dael> dbaron: I think normal thing in these cases is we resolve to 0 during intrinisic-width comp and then resolve width during layout. Is that what you mean with 0?<br>
&lt;Rossen_> what David said ^<br>
&lt;dael> florian: I think that's fine<br>
&lt;dbaron> dbaron: I think that's how we treat % padding and % margin.<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Prop: Handle % text-indent in intrinsic size box same as % in padding and margin<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: This is current behavior as well, we resolve % against containing block so we can't resolve them during intrinsic sizing.<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Other opinions?<br>
&lt;dbaron> (I think this is also what Mats was asking for in the issue.)<br>
&lt;tantek> what Rossen_ said<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Obj?<br>
&lt;dael> RESOLVED: Handle % text-indent in intrinsic size box same as % in padding and margin<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: % padding and margin on a child of the element<br>
&lt;dael> dbaron: I think it's the same as on that element<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: No if you set explicit width resolves correct<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Not really. Element is being intrinsically size. THat's the same so text-indent can't resolve just like you can't do min-width etc.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: BUt when you do resove it's the size of the element, not the size of the parent. Which is different then margins and padding which look at parent<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Don't see how child come sinto play. But le'ts move on. We're on same page<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1597#issuecomment-406001183 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2018 16:54:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 18 July 2018 16:54:18 UTC