[w3ctag/design-reviews] Review for CSS property "aspect-ratio" (#559)

Saluton TAG!

I'm requesting a TAG review of the aspect-ratio CSS property.

[One paragraph summary of idea, ideally copy-pasted from Explainer introduction]

  - Explainer¹ (minimally containing user needs and example code): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VqD0mfkIDyCxQBrrvDw5wEbhXBsmEYIhk6ahiX_fvco/edit#

  - Specification URL: https://drafts.csswg.org/css-sizing-4/#aspect-ratio

  - Tests: https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-sizing/aspect-ratio?label=experimental&label=master&aligned

  - Security and Privacy self-review²: n/a, this only affects sizing of elements
  - GitHub repo (if you prefer feedback filed there): n/a (or https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues)
  - Primary contacts (and their relationship to the specification):
      - Tab Atkins (@tabatkins), Google LLC, Editor
      - Elika Etemad (@fantasai), n/a (Editor)
      - Jen Simmons (?), Mozilla
      -  Christian Biesinger (@cbiesinger), Google LLC (implementor)
  - Organization(s)/project(s) driving the specification: CSSWG and Google LLC
  - Key pieces of existing multi-stakeholder review or discussion of this specification: The CSSWG has been involved in discussing this spec, including people from Mozilla and Google. Mozilla and Google are currently implementing.
  - External status/issue trackers for this specification (publicly visible, e.g. Chrome Status): https://www.chromestatus.com/feature/5738050678161408


Further details:

  - [x] I have reviewed the TAG's [API Design Principles](https://w3ctag.github.io/design-principles/)
  - Relevant time constraints or deadlines: Preferably in the next couple weeks, we'd like to ship soon. Sorry I didn't file this sooner.
  - The group where the work on this specification is currently being done: CSSWG
  - The group where standardization of this work is intended to be done (if current group is a community group or other incubation venue): CSSWG
  - Major unresolved issues with or opposition to this specification: none
  - This work is being funded by: Google

You should also know that...

This form feels overly complex for one fairly straightforward CSS property.

We'd prefer the TAG provide feedback as (please delete all but the desired option):

  💬 leave review feedback as a **comment in this issue** and @-notify @cbiesinger @chrishtr

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAREFULLY READ AND DELETE CONTENT BELOW THIS LINE BEFORE SUBMITTING

Please preview the issue and check that the links work before submitting.

In particular, if anything links to a URL which requires authentication (e.g. Google document), please make sure anyone with the link can access the document. We would prefer fully public documents though, since we work in the open.

¹ We require an explainer to give the relevant context for the spec review, even if the spec has some background information. For background, see our [explanation of how to write a good explainer](https://w3ctag.github.io/explainers). We recommend the explainer to be in [Markdown](https://github.github.com/gfm/).

² A Security and Privacy questionnaire helps us understand potential security and privacy issues and mitigations for your design, and can save us asking redundant questions. See https://www.w3.org/TR/security-privacy-questionnaire/.



-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/559