- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 21:00:32 -0800
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: Karl Dubost <kdubost@mozilla.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:51 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote: > On Tuesday 2015-10-27 09:44 +0900, Karl Dubost wrote: >> Gecko (Firefox) has a Webcompat issue related to the use of `max-width` inside `table`. I put an example on Codepen [1]. >> >> For Webcompat reasons with Blink and WebKit, we will probably need to modify Gecko code (see Bugzilla [2]). In the seeAlso section of this bug, you will find some of the reported Web Compat issues. >> >> What I would like to know is if the CSS specification needs to be changed to reflect the reality. > [...] >> Currently Blink and Safari are reducing the image so it fits the viewport. >> You can see this in recent Web Compat bugs >> https://webcompat.com/issues/1838 >> https://webcompat.com/issues/1837 >> >> I summarized the issue in the webcompat space [4]. > > So the underlying behavior here that needs to be specified is (using > css-sizing terminology) that when either 'width' or 'max-width' on a > replaced element is a percentage, that element's min-content > contribution is zero. Note that given that this occurs for > 'max-width', this needs to override the rule that the min-content > contribution is determined by the specified size, since a replaced > element with "width: 100px; max-width: 50%" has a min-content > contribution of 0. Hi David. So would be the width of outer div here: <container of width 100px> <div style="width:100%; max-width:min-content; "> <div style="width: 100px; max-width: 50%" /> </div> </container> ? As for me it should be 50px. But it appears as you are saying it should be zero? > > The relevant section of the specification is: > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-sizing/#replaced-intrinsic > > At least, that's the relevant specification assuming a relatively > strict definition of replaced element. This rule should not apply > to form controls and similar things that aren't explained by CSS. > It should only apply to things that do replaced element sizing such > as images, plugins, videos, and iframes. > > I'm not sure if we have a clear enough definition of replaced > element, or whether we perhaps need two definitions. > > -David > >> [1]: http://codepen.io/anon/pen/rOdpdW >> [2]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=823483 >> [3]: https://drafts.csswg.org/css2/visudet.html#propdef-max-width >> [4]: https://github.com/whatwg/compat/issues/12 > > -- > 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 > 𝄢 Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂 > Before I built a wall I'd ask to know > What I was walling in or walling out, > And to whom I was like to give offense. > - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914) -- Andrew Fedoniouk. http://sciter.com
Received on Wednesday, 9 December 2015 05:01:03 UTC