- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 20:07:56 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 09/21/2015 04:19 PM, Sergio Villar Senin wrote: > On 19/09/15 00:02, fantasai wrote: >> On 09/18/2015 08:31 AM, Sergio Villar Senin wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'd kindly ask the editors to clarify what being sized under >>> min|max-content constraint exactly means[1] for the track sizing >>> algorithm. In particular I'd like to know if we're talking about just >>> the width|height of the grid container or if we should >>> take a look also to our ancestors to check that (provided the grid has >>> relative or auto sizes). >>> >>> Should we want to extend it to our ancestors then the implementations >>> might start to suffer from severe performance issues >>> because we might need some extra layouts. For example if we want to >>> take into account the values of min|max-width|height >>> restrictions then we need to layout to know whether we're we satisfy >>> or not those conditions. >> >> 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 was assuming that the above was a grid container sized under > min-content constraint, but from your answer this is just a grid > with an indefinite width so the maximize tracks step will grow > all the tracks to their growth limits. Is that correct? No, this is also sized under a min-content constraint. The min-content size is defined to be the minimum size input to the shrink-to-fit formula, so these two things must be the same. ~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 22 September 2015 00:08:30 UTC