- From: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 18:16:19 +0900
- To: Karl Dubost <kdubost@mozilla.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
I don't have an answer to the question, but the way it was tagged might have caused people who do to miss it, so retagging with [css21] and [css-sizing]. - Florian > On 27 Oct 2015, at 09:44, Karl Dubost <kdubost@mozilla.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > 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 see Also 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. > > The CSS specification for `max-width` [3] currently says: > > <percentage> > Specifies a percentage for determining the used value. > The percentage is calculated with respect to the width > of the generated box's containing block. If the containing > block's width is negative, the used value is zero. If the > containing block's width depends on this element's width, > then the resulting layout is undefined in CSS 2.2. > > and… > > In CSS 2.2, the effect of 'min-width' and 'max-width' on > tables, inline tables, table cells, table columns, and > column groups is undefined. > > > 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]. > > > [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 > > -- > Karl Dubost, Mozilla > http://www.la-grange.net/karl/moz > >
Received on Thursday, 12 November 2015 09:16:51 UTC