- From: Sergio Villar Senin <svillar@igalia.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 14:16:07 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 05/11/15 02:33, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Sergio Villar Senin <svillar@igalia.com> wrote: >> On 22/09/15 02:07, fantasai wrote: >>>>> >>>>> It means when you're calculating the min-content/max-content >>>>> contribution of the grid container, e.g. if the grid container >>>>> happens to be inside a float (or is itself a float). >>>> >>>> Oh, so I had taken it completely wrong. OK, just to be 100% sure, >>>> you mean that it does not apply for example to the following >>>> example: >>>> >>>> <div style="display: grid; width: min-content;"></div> >>> >>> It does also apply to this example. >> >> I should have used a better example, as I'm mainly interested in >> heights. So in the following 2 examples: >> >> .grid { display:grid; grid-template: 20px / minmax(50px, 100px); } >> >> <div class="grid" style="height: min-content"></div> >> >> and >> >> <div style="height: min-content"> >> <div class="grid"></div> >> </div> >> >> what are the expected height of the grid container and the height of the >> first and unique row of the grid? >> >> In the code I'm planning to land in Blink soon those values are: >> >> * example 1: grid container height: 50px; grid row: 50px; >> * example 2: grid container height: 100px; grid row: 100px; >> >> are those correct? > > No. Both of them should be 50px in example 2. This is defined in > <https://drafts.csswg.org/css-grid/#algo-grow-tracks>, where a > min-sizing constraint (in this case inherited from its parent) sets > the free space to zero, so the track stays at 50px (the minimum). The problem is that such a behavior ("inheriting" the min-sizing constraint) is not done at all for the rest of the blocks. Check this example were I use vertical writing modes to emulate different values for min-content and max-content for heights. .verticalrl { -webkit-writing-mode: vertical-rl; } .mincontent { height: min-content; } <div id="one" class="mincontent"> <div class="item verticalrl">XXX XXX</div> </div> <div id="two"> <div class="item verticalrl mincontent">XXX XXX</div> </div> For #one the item takes as much height as it needs to position all the text in one "column" (i.e. only obeys its auto height), but in #two the item is indeed sized under min-content constraint. So, why should we want to have a different behavior for grid containers? BR
Received on Thursday, 5 November 2015 13:16:34 UTC