- From: Christian Biesinger via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 17:35:35 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
cbiesinger has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts: == [css-sizing-4] aspect-ratio min-content size with % width == https://drafts.csswg.org/css-sizing-4/#aspect-ratio Usually, aspect-ratio is supposed to behave like a replaced element with that ratio. However, there is one behavior difference: If a replaced element has a percentage width, the min-content size becomes 0: https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/master:third_party/blink/renderer/core/layout/layout_replaced.cc;l=912;drc=df8f58d9311eb29e65394e437a156b00fafc9a67;bpv=1;bpt=1 This is not the case with aspect-ratio, and when combined with contain-intrinsic-size this can lead to undesired effects, quoting from an email I got: > 1. Go to https://dvoytenko.github.io/aspect-ratio-css/#x-intrinsic-and-float > 2. Make the window smaller. Around innerWidth=300 you can see things pretty well. > 3. Observe that both "Native", "Emulated" and "Images" sections are identical and things are as expected. > 4. Now, in DevTools disable `max-width: 100%;` from `.intrinsic-and-float .outer-cell {}` rule. > 5. Observe that all "Emulated" and "Images" are the same. But "Native" now expanded to the full size in the contain-intrinsic-size. Should this behavior be spec'd for aspect-ratio? @dvoytenko @bfgeek @fantasai Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5549 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 24 September 2020 17:35:37 UTC