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

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-sizing] cyclic percentage concept should not exist

From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 23:24:59 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-420093616-1536621899-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
dbaron is nitpicking over the word "depends on" right now. ^_^ The *intention* is that its everything that's an input to the given algorithm. Sizing 4, in particular, actually defines how to calculate the intrinsic sizes (and intrinsic size contributions) for every layout type; it thus lists all of the inputs to each, and those are the things "depended on".

However, we *believe* there's an equivalent behavior-based description of this concept: When calculating an intrinsic size in a given axis, all percentages you need to resolve in that axis are inherently cyclic. (The only non-cyclic percentages are those "hidden" inside of boxes whose intrinsic size contribution is some definite size, rather than being an intrinsic size themselves. These percentages won't be looked at during the calculation of the ancestor's intrinsic size.)

Percentages in the *other* axis can still resolve normally, if their containing block is definite in that axis, etc.  (You might need to pay attention to this if the size in the axis under consideration depends on the other-axis size, such as when resolving images with aspect ratios. See <http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/6213> for such an example where we resolve the % today.)

I don't *think* there's a counter-example to this.

GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3010#issuecomment-420093616 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 10 September 2018 23:25:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 10 September 2018 23:25:02 UTC