- From: gitspeaks via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2025 11:39:14 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
This issue specifically concerns the use of the term *"outer"* in phrases like: - "outer hypothetical main size" - "outer hypothetical cross size" - "outer cross size" - "outer flex base size" The confusion is not with the phrase *"hypothetical main/cross size"*, which indeed resolves correctly since *"hypothetical"* is about the min/max constraints applied to width/height. The problem arises when *"outer"* is combined with *"cross size"* / "hypothetical main size" / "flex base size" under the current definitions, as it creates a semantic conflict— read: "margin box size `width`", "margin box size flex base size" which doesn't make sense structurally. I proposed defining *"outer main size"* and not *"outer hypothetical main size"* Since I find it intuitive how *"hypothetical"* would apply in context when *"outer main size"* is clearly defined. That said, if clarity demands further precision, I would fully support including the following definitions: - Outer hypothetical main size: The *outer main size* after applying min/max constraints to the *main size*. - Outer hypothetical cross size: The *outer cross size* after applying min/max constraints to the *cross size*. -- GitHub Notification of comment by gitspeaks Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11425#issuecomment-2569093020 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 3 January 2025 11:39:15 UTC