- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 16:59:17 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `Computed value of background-size includes missing autos`, and agreed to the following: * `RESOLVED: No change to spec` <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <dael> Topic: Computed value of background-size includes missing autos<br> <dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2574<br> <dael> emilio: The spec says the computed value includes the missing autos. I think we don't need to impl if not relevent. Webkit and Blink do that. I think Edge was with FF. There were wpt tests depended on them.<br> <dael> TabAtkins: Agree. Should obit autos when not necessary. Irrelevent to issue because that's about computed value. Serialization is defined off of computed, but does not match computed. The point of computed value is to get a well structured value in specs. You serialize in shortest value. I agree serialize without autos, but issue is invalid.<br> <dael> emilio: Note to spec saying that?<br> <dael> AmeliaBR: Good explination TabAtkins but if multiple impl misinterpret we need to explain it somewhere. Computed value has auto for missing values but in serialization dropped following shortest serialized.<br> <dael> TabAtkins: Should add a note in cascade which we link to when talking about computed. We should have a specific note this is not serialization rules.<br> <dael> AmeliaBR: Is it something the missing autos should be mentioned in computed value line? If that's the as spec value has the implied auto for unspec dimension ?<br> <dael> TabAtkins: That it's not there means it's not there. To talk about a value we have to handle the full panoply of things or we say computed value has all the possible things. Computed values designed to be eary to work with and roughly model interior.<br> <dael> fantasai: Computed value is not about serialization. WE should clarify that in a central place.<br> <dael> florian: That the method you call is getComputedValue does confuse but what they say is try<br> <florian> s/you call/you call to get the serialization/<br> <dael> Rossen_: For CSS Backgrounds sounds like no change. Can we resolve on that? If need to add text to Values or somewhere that's great but I'd want us to make progress here.<br> <florian> s/try/true/<br> <dael> TabAtkins: Yes, no change is valid.<br> <dael> Rossen_: Objections to resolving no change?<br> <dael> RESOLVED: No change to spec<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2574#issuecomment-505960214 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 26 June 2019 16:59:18 UTC