Re: [css-grid] Grid Layout Algorithm Rewritten!

On 25/04/14 19:18, Simon Sapin wrote:
>> * For intrinsic track sizes, use an initial base size of zero and an
>> initial growth limit of infinity.
>> * For flexible track sizes, use an initial base size of infinity.
>>
>> A track with a flexible minimum sizing function is treated exactly as
>> if it had a fixed min track sizing function of zero; except when the
>> grid container is being sized under a min-content constraint, in
>> which case it is treated exactly as min-content.
> 
> Isn’t that paragraph in contradiction with the last bullet point above?
> 
> Do "<em>minimum</em> <i>sizing function</i>" and "<i>min track sizing
> function</i>" (in Bikeshed markup) refer to the same thing? If so, it
> may be preferable to use the same markup and cross-reference links.

The issue pointed out by Simon is quite valid IMO and hasn't got any
response yet. Could it be clarified please? It looks like the
contradiction is pretty obvious unless I'm missing something also pretty
obvious :)

FWIW before the rewrite the algorithm was using 0 unconditionally for
flex tracks.

Also "minimum" sizing function is not used at all in the rest of the
spec. Are we talking about the min track sizing function? If so I think
it would be better to replace the "minimum" word as it's confusing.

I also have some extra questions about the paragraph bellow the bullets:
- when it says "is treated" does it refer to the initialization phase
only or does it mean that we should use the new min sizing function (0
or min-content) for the rest of the algorithm?
- should it be considered only for the initialization phase then I guess
it can be simplified a lot since it will mean that either:
    a) grid container is sized under min-content -> min sizing function
= min-content -> it's a content-dependent function -> initial base size
= 0 and grow limit = infinity
    b) grid container is not sized under min-content ->  min sizing
function = 0

BR

Received on Thursday, 19 June 2014 15:21:29 UTC