- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:21:02 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 07/13/2012 12:24 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote: > On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com <mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com>> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com <mailto:esprehn@gmail.com>> wrote: > > I'm trying to implement the writing mode width and height keywords in webkit > > and I realized the equation is backwards in the spec from the one it > > references. > > > > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-writing-modes/#intrinsic-sizing > > > > max(min-content, min(max-content, fill-available)) > > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#float-width > > > > min(max(preferred minimum width, available width), preferred width) > > > > which seems to be equivalent with the new keywords to: > > > > min(max-content, max(min-content, fill-available)) > > > > Which is indeed what the code in Webkit currently does for the keyword > > "intrinsic" (old name for fit-content) and for floats. > > The two orderings are functionally identical, no? > > Still, is there any reason to be different? The webkit code for this does it the CSS2.1 way and everyone who looks at that > code and reads the writing mode spec needs to think through it to confirm that they're the same. The same obviously applies to > anyone looking at both specs. Seems silly. May as well change it, no? Okay ~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2012 01:21:30 UTC