- From: Alison Maher via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 21:24:28 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
As others have noted, because placement and sizing happen at different times in grid and masonry, I think this is a case where things will ultimately need to diverge between the two. We agreed to reuse the grid-template properties between both, so if we allow this for masonry [as currently defined in the spec](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-grid-3/#masonry-intrinsic-repeat), we need to be able to parse and allow some version of this in Grid. In Chromium, allowing intrinsic tracks in an auto repeat has been implemented as a proof of concept for Masonry per current draft spec text (check out the [blogpost for an example ](https://developer.chrome.com/blog/masonry-update) to play with - and note that you will need to enable the Masonry feature flag for this to work). This overall works well and provides a reasonable output in most cases for Masonry (with [percentage handling](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12432) being the main open question that I came across when implementing). One potential (albeit not so great, but simple) option would be to allow intrinsic auto repeats in Grid, as well, but those always resolve to 1 repeat in Grid and then follow the current spec definition for Masonry. This would be a weird divergence but ultimately comes down to differences in the two different layout algorithms and what each allows for in terms of possible functionality. -- GitHub Notification of comment by alisonmaher Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9321#issuecomment-3192799650 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 15 August 2025 21:24:32 UTC