- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 17:54:00 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `Abspos alignment in vertical axis should care about align-self, just like horizontal/justify-self`, and agreed to the following:
* `RESOLVED: align-self affect the block static position of abspos element`
<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
<fantasai> Topic: Abspos alignment in vertical axis should care about align-self, just like horizontal/justify-self<br>
<fantasai> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4983<br>
<fremy> ScribeNick: fremy<br>
<fremy> fantasai: when you use abspos, and auto inset on both sides, when we try to find its static position<br>
<cbiesinger> yeah, I think AmeliaBR is right wrt the interaction not causing additional scrollbars<br>
<TabAtkins> So in `div { width: max-content; contain-intrinsic-size: 100px 100px; overflow: auto; }` with 150px of content, the element is 100px by 100px, with a vertical scrollbar only. (Unless for some reason there's an unbreakable inline in the content that wouldn't fit into 84px.) But in `div { width: max-content; height: 50px; contain-intrinsic-size: 100px 100px; overflow: auto; }` with 150px of content, the element is 116px by 50px with a vertical<br>
<TabAtkins> scollbar, because the cis overflowed the specified height and triggered a scrollbar, so scrollbar size is part of the max-content size. The content lays out into there, and continues to have *only* a vertical scrollbar, again unless the content has an unbreakable inline long enough to force a horizontal one.<br>
<fremy> fantasai: this historically depends on the size of its containing block to decide on which margin we ingore<br>
<fremy> fantasai: if you use alignment properties however, like end, then we will honor that<br>
<fremy> fantasai: we didn't do that in the vertical axis however<br>
<fremy> fantasai: so, the question is why not?<br>
<fremy> fantasai: I would like to make that change, and propose it to the group<br>
<fremy> iank_: today, align-self affects where the static position is in the inline position of the static contaning block, not the actual containing block<br>
<fremy> fantasai: yes<br>
<fremy> fantasai: the proposal is to also do that in the other direction (in the block axis) of the static block containig block<br>
<cbiesinger> TabAtkins: that matches my understanding<br>
<fremy> iank_: don't we do that for flexbox?<br>
<fremy> fantasai: maybe, I'm not sure<br>
<fremy> Rossen_: I'm pretty sure we do<br>
<fantasai> s/align-self/justify-self/<br>
<fremy> iank_: if that's in the direction of the static block containg block, that sounds fine to me<br>
<fremy> fantasai: ok<br>
<fremy> iank_: that sounds good to me then<br>
<astearns> q?<br>
<fremy> cbiesinger: one concern though<br>
<astearns> ack dholbert<br>
<fremy> cbiesinger: so far, all properties don't affect all layout modes<br>
<fremy> cbiesinger: like in flexbox, justify-self don't apply (?)<br>
<fremy> cbiesinger: not sure we should change that<br>
<fremy> fantasai: that's an interesting point<br>
<fremy> iank_: justify-self doesn't work today<br>
<fremy> fantasai: I think we should take that as a separate question<br>
<fremy> fantasai: whether to make justify-self apply to the flexbox case<br>
<iank_> https://www.software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?saved=8037<br>
<fremy> iank_: I am looking at what chrome is doing today<br>
<fremy> iank_: basically justify-self should probably work on that case, that seems fine to me<br>
<fremy> cbiesinger: but justify-self doesn't mean anything for flexbox, that's why it doesn't apply though<br>
<fremy> iank_: we might run into some webcompat issues yeah<br>
<fremy> cbiesinger: webcompat is one thing, but more than that, I'm not sure it makes sense<br>
<fremy> fantasai: we want to make align-self apply in the vertical axis (?)<br>
<fremy> fantasai: align-self does not affect the static position in that layout mode but it would probably be useful<br>
<fremy> iank_: you mean block direction of the static containing block right?<br>
<fremy> fantasai: yes<br>
<fremy> iank_: and in block layout?<br>
<fremy> fantasai: it's defined to be zero height in that case<br>
<fremy> iank_: still sounds fine then<br>
<fantasai> s/it's/staticpos rectangle/<br>
<TabAtkins> I asked one more question about the previous issue <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4415#issuecomment-621365480> that could use some opinions.<br>
<fremy> astearns: so, do we make that a proposed resolution ?<br>
<fremy> astearns: any objection to that?<br>
<fremy> astearns: if that doesn't cause webcompat though<br>
<fremy> fantasai: we definitely need to look into flex more closely, but I think the case we discuss now should be fine wrt web compat<br>
<fremy> astearns: proposed resolution is to have align-self affect the vertical static position of abspos element<br>
<fremy> s/vertical/block<br>
<fremy> astearns: any objection?<br>
<fremy> RESOLVED: align-self affect the block static position of abspos element<br>
</details>
--
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4983#issuecomment-621367152 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 29 April 2020 17:54:03 UTC