- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 13:38:17 -0500
- To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 3/12/12 12:06 PM, Alex Mogilevsky wrote: > You don't understand what it means that width or height are not shrink-to-fit, or you don't understand why a new term "definite" is used for it? I don't understand the goal of the "definite" term in this context; the way it's being used with percentage width is definitely NOT a synonym for "not shrink-to-fit". As a specific instance, I don't understand what the desired behavior is in the example where the child is "width: 25%" and the parent is "width: 400px; min-width: 50%" and the granparent's width varies between 300px and 1000px depending on viewport size. If I just need to read something in particular to understand the context and goals here, I'd appreciate a pointer... -Boris
Received on Monday, 12 March 2012 18:38:51 UTC