Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-sizing] Resolved value of min size properties doesn't round-trip (#11716)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-sizing] Resolved value of min size properties doesn't round-trip`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: When aspect-ratio is non-initial, then min-size:auto serializes as 'auto' in gCS() (rather than being censored to 0)`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;TabAtkins> oriol: summarizing last time...<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> oriol: min-height and min-width have initial value of 'auto' but for back-compat gCS() returns 0 on all elements except flex and grid items<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> oriol: however, Sizing 4 added a new effect to 'auto', when you're using aspect-ratio<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> oriol: so it's not equivalent to zero on those elements<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> oriol: so my proposal was that if aspect-ratio had a non-initial value, gCS() would stay as 'auto' rather than becoming 0<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> oriol: Ian wanted to time to check on stuff, he just said he's okay with this special-casing, not sure if he means the proposal<br>
&lt;weinig> q+<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> TabAtkins: I read his comment as meaning your proposal, yeah<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> weinig: Is there a known compat concern with just returning auto always for min size properties?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> weinig: do we think it'll actually break sites?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> oriol: Not sure<br>
&lt;astearns> ack weinig<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> oriol: Possibly the editors that said it originally have an idea. but changing that seems riskier.<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> oriol: so not suggesting changing that for now, can do another issue to investigate<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> dbaron: I think changing a behavior that's small-integer number of years old is much less scary than changing a 20yo behavior<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> weinig: fair enough, just wanted to mention it<br>
&lt;astearns> ack fantasai<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: yeah, because this affects the initial value, which is what you'll usually get back for it, and for a property that's 20+ years old<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: we didn't do a compat analysis, but we suspected there would be a problem<br>
&lt;dbaron> I'm dating it back to when getComputedStyle was interoperable, which I think is newer than the min-width/min-height properties! :-)<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> astearns: so the proposed resolution si that when aspect-ratio is non-initial, then min-size:auto serializes as 'auto' in gCS() (rather than being censored to 0)<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> dholbert: in both axises, right?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> oriol: yes<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> RESOLVED: When aspect-ratio is non-initial, then min-size:auto serializes as 'auto' in gCS() (rather than being censored to 0)<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11716#issuecomment-2754978904 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Wednesday, 26 March 2025 16:13:18 UTC