- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 22:07:07 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-grid-1] Track Sizing Algorithm question`, and agreed to the following: * `RESOLVED: when distributing past growth limits, we distribute prioritizing tracks that have max-content max-track-sizing function` <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <emilio> oriol: this was about a test-case with 2 tracks, sized min-content and auto<br> <emilio> ... resulting behavior was not what the author expected<br> <emilio> ... discussed in july and resolved to try improving it<br> <emilio> ... after a detailed analysis my understanding is that there were two problems<br> <emilio> ... one was the author's fault<br> <emilio> ... auto track sizing had different meanings if used as a max or min<br> <emilio> ... so we had a smaller minimum, so I think the author should fix the minimums using minmax<br> <emilio> ... this will provide the expected behavior on some cases<br> <emilio> ... but not others. To address those others is that when we're distributing, right now we try to respect the growth limit, but if all tracks have reached the limit then we distribute between tracks that have intrinsic sizes<br> <emilio> ... but we don't differentiate between min and max-content<br> <emilio> ... so to fix this the proposal is to first try to distribute first to the max-content max-sizing functions, then min-content<br> <emilio> ... fit-content() is a bit trickier<br> <emilio> ... will initially behave as max-content, and at some point it'd be fixed so it'd use the min-content rules<br> <emilio> ... not sure if there's websites that would break<br> <emilio> ... would improve the test-cases here and it seems reasonable<br> <emilio> dholbert: in the block axis min/max-content are the same, does it make sense to differentiate between them?<br> <emilio> fantasai: min-content / max-content contributions are the same but the sizing keyword is different so we could give them different behavior<br> <emilio> oriol: those are keywords for track-sizing which aren't the same as css-sizing<br> <emilio> emilio: so this would still apply in the block axis<br> <emilio> oriol: yeah this doesn't depend on whether the contributions are the same, just about prioritizing<br> <emilio> ... height: min/max-content behaves the same as auto, which is true in implementations but not in the spec for grid/flex at least<br> <emilio> dholbert: [quotes spec]<br> <emilio> ... but yeah sounds fine<br> <emilio> astearns: concerns? oriol can you summarize the proposal?<br> <emilio> oriol: when distributing past growth limits, we distribute prioritizing tracks that have max-content max-track-sizing function<br> <emilio> RESOLVED: when distributing past growth limits, we distribute prioritizing tracks that have max-content max-track-sizing function<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2873#issuecomment-1939674368 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 12 February 2024 22:07:10 UTC