- From: gitspeaks via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2025 15:44:50 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> So it doesn't mean that the used width is a special undefined value, it still needs to be a length, it's just not defined how this length is produced. Ah, I see what you mean now. >It's undefined, so browsers can do whatever they want (according to CSS2, not to CSS Sizing). > Note `aspect-ratio` isn't in CSS2. But anyways your `img` isn't replaced and has `display: inline`, better try with `display: block`. Or `<svg viewbox="0 0 1 1" style="background-color: blue">`. I had a typo earlier with the stray `<span>`. What I meant was: ```html <!DOCTYPE html> <div> <img src="" alt="test" style="background-color: blue; aspect-ratio: 1 / 1" /> </div> ``` In Chrome, the dev tools computed styles are: contain-intrinsic-width: none contain-intrinsic-height: none width: 38.225px height: 18.4px aspect-ratio: auto So it looks like the dimensions are being influenced by the text placeholder (e.g the broken image icon), and the `aspect-ratio` is ignored entirely. As [CSS Sizing 4](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-sizing-4/#aspect-ratio) points out: > ISSUE6: CSS2.1 does not cleanly differentiate between replaced elements vs. elements with an aspect ratio; need to figure out specific cases that are unclear and define them, either in the appropriate Level 3 spec or here. So the question is: Should a replaced element with an aspect-ratio and no intrinsic size be treated how? Right now, it seems like the behavior is not covered by either CSS2.1 or modern specs. -- GitHub Notification of comment by gitspeaks Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12254#issuecomment-2931323915 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 2 June 2025 15:44:51 UTC