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

Re: [css-grid][css-align] Intrinsic size of replaced elements, and no shrink-to-fit algorithm

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 14:17:41 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBH-vSUiCi4Y2DvTJmgFQXxSyPNiwNTtB9K574n4KBRhw@mail.gmail.com>
To: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 2:00 PM, François REMY
<francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote:
>> Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com]:
>> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 9:18 AM, François REMY
>> <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote:
>> > The cross-browser issue is that the <video> elements is sized % the
>> > video content in Firefox,
>> I'm not sure what this means.
> If the video file is a 800x600 video, the <video> elements takes that size.
> If seems like this isn't the case in Chrome and IE, if I'm not mistaken.

What I meant is that the phrase "sized % the video content" doesn't
make sense.  But you've rephrased in an understandable manner, so
that's okay now.

I dunno what behavior HTML defines, and I don't use <video> often
enough to tell what it is in practice. I'll trust you. ^_^

>> Are you looking at
>> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-align/#justify-self-property for the definition
>> of "stretch"? Note that this is different than the justify-content definition.  In
>> particular, it'll shrink too-big things.
> I'm speaking about the default behavior of a grid item. I'm not sure what is the default value of all the align properties in the case of a grid, though.
> I would be interested in what happens in both cases though.

Just read the spec; "auto" computes to "stretch", and "stretch" makes
it match the size of the alignment container (without regard as to
whether it's bigger or smaller).

Received on Friday, 15 May 2015 21:18:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:54 UTC