- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 22:11:59 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I chatted with @bfgeek about this today. Currently our behavior for flex items is to treat width/height:stretch as equivalent to width/height:100%, rather than equivalent to stretch alignment. This equivalency is correct in most other places, but differs here, as you point out. However, the equivalency is *also* broken in abspos, where %s resolve against the original CB size but stretch alignment (and `width:auto`) resolves against the IMCB; Chrome implements width/height:stretch to fill the IMCB, matching stretch alignment. So, I'm inclined to say we should try and follow the spec's text. It's consistent with the behavior in all other locations, afaik, and presents a more useful behavior for this case. It does mean widening the delta between `stretch` and `-webkit-fill-available`, so there's potentially some compat risk, but I'd like to try for it if possible. However, if it turns out this is an issue, I'm okay with resolving to match the 100% behavior in this case instead. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11784#issuecomment-2734854579 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 18 March 2025 22:12:00 UTC