W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > July 2020

[csswg-drafts] [css-sizing-4] Splitting intrinsic size / content-based size into two concepts (#5305)

From: fantasai via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2020 08:17:36 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issues.opened-653862550-1594282655-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
fantasai has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts:

== [css-sizing-4] Splitting intrinsic size / content-based size into two concepts ==
Following up on https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5032#issuecomment-639874263 and https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2020Jul/0004.html

The min-content and max-content sizes are defined to take aspect-ratio into account (see above discussion for why). However, in our specs at least, we probably need a separate set of terms for talking about the content-based size ignoring aspect ratio. This issue is for naming this concept, auditing our specs to use it, and maybe also deciding whether not we want a separate set of keywords to represent it explicitly in our sizing properties.

Whatever that term is, it's probably good to match it with the middle part of what is currently `contain-intrinsic-size`, also.

Using `intrinsic` is a bit tricky since we've been using intrinsic to refer to the min-content/max-content sizes for awhile. Also it's hard to pronounce/spell, so not a great candidate for author-facing APIs. Another suggestion was `natural` size, to match the DOM APIs on images. Other suggestions welcome, this is a bikeshedding issue.

Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5305 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 9 July 2020 08:17:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:42:11 UTC