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

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-sizing-3][css-images-3] Distinguish intrinsic size's two definitions with two terms (#4961)

From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 22:47:19 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-713183003-1603234037-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
The CSS Working Group just discussed `Distinguish intrinsic size's two definitions with two terms`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: Rename temr "intrinsic size" of image with "natural size"`
* `RESOLVED: Republish WD of css-sizing-3`
* `RESOLVED: Add emilio as editor of cssom-view`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;Rossen_> Topic:  Distinguish intrinsic size's two definitions with two terms<br>
&lt;Rossen_> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4961<br>
&lt;tantek> fantasai: we've been using intrinsic size to refer to two different concepts<br>
&lt;tantek> ... one is the size of a replacement element<br>
&lt;tantek> ... the other concept is referring to the min-content and max-content sizes, which always exists for any box, they are determined in some manner<br>
&lt;tantek> ... we need two different terms for this<br>
&lt;tantek> ... the HTML spec uses the term natural width and natural height<br>
&lt;florian> q+<br>
&lt;tantek> ... we were thinking to replace the use of intrinsic size as it applies to the inherit size of a replaced element with natural size<br>
&lt;tantek> ... and keep intrinsic size to mean the other<br>
&lt;Rossen_> ack florian<br>
&lt;myles> q+ to ask if this is a behavior change<br>
&lt;heycam> +1 for aligning terms across specs<br>
&lt;tantek> florian: with the new dfn, the intrinsic size of a replacement it would be the natural size and 0 otherwise?<br>
&lt;tantek> fantasai: no it can lack an intrinsic size<br>
&lt;tantek> florian: I don't understand<br>
&lt;tantek> fantasai: you have to distinguish between whether you are taking about a min-content and a max-content size<br>
&lt;cbiesinger> q+<br>
&lt;tantek> fantasai: when the natural size of something does not exist, there are rules for determining<br>
&lt;heycam> q+<br>
&lt;Rossen_> ack myles<br>
&lt;Zakim> myles, you wanted to ask if this is a behavior change<br>
&lt;tantek> myles: is this purely a rename or behavior change?<br>
&lt;tantek> fantasai: purely terminology in the spec<br>
&lt;Rossen_> ack cbiesinger<br>
&lt;tantek> cbiesinger: this is only for replacements but, don't you need a terminology for non-replaced elements with an aspect ratio because the regular min and max content size will be affected by the aspect ratio, but you also need a way to refer to the original min and max content size because you need that for width and height auto<br>
&lt;Rossen_> q?<br>
&lt;tantek> fantasai: I see what you're talking about, havent' thought about that yet<br>
&lt;cbiesinger> s/replacements/replaced elements/g<br>
&lt;Rossen_> ack heycam<br>
&lt;tantek> heycam: we should check what the HTML spec says<br>
&lt;tantek> ... and I did, and they return 0<br>
&lt;cbiesinger> s/width and height auto/min-size auto/<br>
&lt;cbiesinger> tantek: yep!<br>
&lt;Rossen_> q<br>
&lt;tantek> ... I just want to make sure we don't have any confusion by using the same terms<br>
&lt;tantek> fantasai: I think the DOM APIs can return 0 when there is no natural size<br>
&lt;tantek> TabAtkins: do the DOM APIs refer to it any other way other than the camelcased form?<br>
&lt;tantek> heycam: no it refers to JS properties<br>
&lt;tantek> florian: this is confusing / not good<br>
&lt;fantasai> scribenick: fantasai<br>
&lt;fantasai> fantasai: Their spec is using 'intrinsic size' because that's what our spec uses.<br>
&lt;fantasai> fantasai: when we update our specs, we'll make sure HTML updates their terms to match als<br>
&lt;fantasai> Rossen_: Hearing mostly support for having this clear distinction<br>
&lt;fantasai> Rossen_: Are we leaning towards also accepting the proposed names here, "natural size"?<br>
&lt;heycam> s/and the return 0/and they return 0 for images that have no natural size/<br>
&lt;florian> +1<br>
&lt;fantasai> fantasai: 2 votes in favor from rachelandrew and SimonSapin<br>
&lt;bkardell_> +1<br>
&lt;fantasai> Rossen_: I don't see anyone not liking it. Any objections?<br>
&lt;bkardell_> actually this confused me quite a bit last year<br>
&lt;bkardell_> I remember having exactly this converation with tab in toronto trying to figure it out<br>
&lt;fantasai> RESOLVED: Rename temr "intrinsic size" of image with "natural size"<br>
&lt;fantasai> s/temr/term/<br>
&lt;fantasai> Rossen_: Seems like everything on Sizing 3<br>
&lt;fantasai> Rossen_: Alan has an editorial issue to talk about<br>
&lt;fantasai> Rossen_: With everything we resolved, do we need to republish<br>
&lt;fantasai> fantasai: yes, and<br>
&lt;fantasai> fantasai: That closes all the major issues on this spec, so we'd like to issue a last call for comments and start preparing for CR<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: so resolution to publish after all these edits are in?<br>
&lt;fantasai> RESOLVED: Republish WD of css-sizing-3<br>
&lt;fantasai> and start CR process after that<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: emilio just volunteered taking on cssom-view at least on the issues he raised<br>
&lt;fantasai> RESOLVED: Add emilio as editor of cssom-view<br>
&lt;smfr> thank you emilio!<br>
&lt;myles> emilio is the best<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4961#issuecomment-713183003 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 20 October 2020 22:47:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:42:20 UTC