Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-grid] Grid track sizing items spanning a flexible track

The Working Group just discussed `Grid track sizing items spanning a flexible track`, and agreed to the following resolutions:

* `RESOLVED: Grid items spanning fr tracks do contribute to fr resolution for intrinsic sizes with the addition that fr tracks not 1 to 1 ratio get contributed to based on that ratio.`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic: Grid track sizing items spanning a flexible track<br>
&lt;dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2177<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: This was a case where when MS designed algo if you had an item that spanned an auto track and a flexible track the space rewuired to fir the item would go intot he flexible track. this is frequently used in design where the auto track is tight to the content only in it.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: We inherited this in algo. When you shrinkwrap the grid we don't have a point at which we consider the size of the spanning item. Flexible track goes to 0 and the other track doesn't expand so it overflows.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Manuel's picture in the first message shows the problem. #1, 2, and 3 thegrid expands to the full width of the item. But in the 2fr columns they don't. In section 5 is the problem. 1 auto and 1 fr. a single auto or 2 autos exapnd correctly, but because the interaction of auto and fr you don't get the good behavior.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Rossen_ explained high level how to incorporate this into algo. TabAtkins and I tried to do that, but we realized you might have multi fr tracks or a different ratio. We added a new section and changed how space is distributed to try and keep the ratio as far as we can. There are conflicting requirements like try and shrink as small as you can. You don't always have tightest or idea flex, but you gete close.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: We'd like WG review on if this is the right way or if there's other ideas on how to do this.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: What you desc for multi fr track with a different ratio then 1 to 1 your proposal is reasonable and what I'd expect. From that PoV I'm fine with the proposal. I haven't done a full review, but I won't block because I trust you did the changes you outlined and it sounds good to me.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Is this agenda+ to elevate awareness or do you want to resolve?<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: If everyone who wants to look has let's resolve but if anyone wants time to review that's fine.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Does anyone want more time to review? I personally don't.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Then can we resolve on the current proposal? Grid items spanning fr tracks do contribute to fr resolution for intrinisic sizes with the addition that fr tracks not 1 to 1 ratio get contributed to based on that ratio.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: fantasai if you've got better wording.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: looks good to me.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Opinions or objections?<br>
&lt;dael> RESOLVED: Grid items spanning fr tracks do contribute to fr resolution for intrinsic sizes with the addition that fr tracks not 1 to 1 ratio get contributed to based on that ratio.<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2177#issuecomment-386149694 using your GitHub account

Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2018 23:14:23 UTC