- From: Peter Salas <psalas@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 18:14:28 +0000
- To: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>, CSS WG <www-style@w3.org>
- CC: Tab Atkins <jackalmage@gmail.com>
François REMY wrote: > > - If the track has a ‘max-content’ max track sizing function, set its > growth limit to the maximum of the items’ max-content contributions. > This is undefined, there is no such item (so I leave limit=infinity) > -- I guess the difference between IE and me is here, it probably > sets the limit to 0 at this step, why? Not quite; this is done after accommodating spanning items. In the earlier version of the algorithm, this was the purpose of Step 4 in ResolveContentBasedTrackSizingFunctions[1]. I don't see a place in the latest editor's draft algorithm where this happens though. > If yes, then we set the growth limit to 0 instead of keeping > it equal to the infinity when there's no span-of-one item in a column. > Therefore, how can we possibly get a limit of infinity in the following > steps, which seem to take care of this possibility in multiple places? By "the following steps" were you referring to the "accommodate spanning items" step? If not, I don't think there should be any infinite values after resolving the content-based keywords; I think this is confirmed by the note at the bottom of the "Resolve Content-Based Track Sizing Functions" in the editor's draft[2]. Does that answer your question? Peter [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-css-grid-1-20140123/#function-ResolveContentBasedTrackSizingFunctions-algorithm [2] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-grid/#algo-content
Received on Monday, 18 August 2014 18:14:59 UTC