- From: Ian Kilpatrick via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2019 20:55:17 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
bfgeek has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts: == [css-sizing-4] Give explicit control to author for "minimum" AR, vs. "strict" AR? == https://drafts.csswg.org/css-sizing-4/#aspect-ratio-minimum There are two clear use cases for AR. One where it applies as a "minimum" and one where it is "strict" (always maintains the aspect-ratio). It is common for a web developers to apply a "max-height: 100px;" rule to scrollable containers. E.g. ```html <div style="width: 100px; aspect-ratio: 1/1; max-height: 200px;"> content </div> ``` In the above example you aren't able to specify that you'd like the aspect ratio to apply as a minimum, i.e. if "content" is 120px high it'll trigger scrollable overflow, when they may want to to reach 200px before overflow is triggered. Is it worth having an explicit keyword for giving control over this behaviour? E.g. `aspect-ratio: 1/1 strict;` A potential similar usecase applies when using the min-height in this manner. E.g. a "minimum" aspect-ratio, with a min-height rule. Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4636 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 30 December 2019 20:55:18 UTC