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: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 23:28:51 +0200
Message-ID: <DUB405-EAS4379EF7E5BE6696F12B1C3A5C70@phx.gbl>
To: "'Tab Atkins Jr.'" <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: "'www-style list'" <www-style@w3.org>
> >> > 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. ^_^

I don't know which behavior the HTML specs defines either, I'm just discovering the behavior isn't the same in all browsers ^_^


> >> 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).

Hum, this isn't what I implemented. I am pretty sure this was the behavior I initially implemented and I got feedback this wasn't the expected behavior. In particular, both IE and Chrome seem not to shrink-to-fit by default. 

Am I missing something?

Thanks for your reply,
François
Received on Friday, 15 May 2015 21:29:21 UTC

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