W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2015

Re: [css-multicol][css-sizing] Intrinsic Sizes of Multi-column Elements

From: Morten Stenshorne <mstensho@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 21:43:35 +0100
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <87wq23ij60.fsf@aeneas.oslo.osa>
fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> writes:

> On 03/19/2015 03:57 AM, Morten Stenshorne wrote:

>> And did you mean "actual column count" (not "used column count", BTW)?
>> See http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-multicol-1/#pseudo-algorithm
>
> Ah. Yes. That's weird, used values are supposed to take
> layout into account.

Somehow we need to be able to distinguish between the column count we
calculate based on available width (and computed value of column-count)
on one hand, and on the other hand the column count we actually end up
with after layout (which depends on content, available height, and the
number of forced breaks).

The used column-count value can be calculated when the available width
is known, which may require the used width of the containing block to be
known (unless a fixed width is specified on the multicol container
itself). So the used value takes layout of the containing block into
account, while the actual value takes layout of the multicol container
into account as well.

Isn't this kind of similar to how min-height and max-height affect the
value of the height property, at least if computed height is auto?
Hmm... the spec [1] talks about "tentative used height" vs. "used
height". The tentative "used height" would be the height of the content,
while the uh... actual "used height" :-P would be clamped to max-height
and min-height.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/REC-CSS2-20110607/visudet.html#min-max-heights

-- 
---- Morten Stenshorne, developer, Opera Software ASA ----
------------------ http://www.opera.com/ -----------------
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2015 20:45:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:30 UTC