Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-grid] Note implies losing an aspect-ratio when it shouldn't? (#5713)

> What's the point of having them as different values, then?

My answer would be - for the default behaviour switch between replaced and non-replaced elements.

So there are two clear options here.
1) Define a "strong" stretch, and a "weak" stretch. E.g. if you have `justify-self: stretch` this is a "strong" stretch, `justify-self: normal` is a "weak" stretch. The priority list for this would be something like:
 - "weak" stretch alignment.
 - aspect-ratio transferred size.
 - "strong" stretch alignment.
 - definite size.

2) Define an aspect-ratio transferred size as have higher priority than stretch alignment, e.g.
 - stretch alignment.
 - aspect-ratio transferred size.
 - definite size.

I prefer (2) as I somewhat view a aspect-ratio with a definite size in the opposite axis the same as, a definite size in the original axis.

@fantasai any thoughts?

GitHub Notification of comment by bfgeek
Please view or discuss this issue at using your GitHub account

Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in

Received on Friday, 13 November 2020 22:58:10 UTC