W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2016

Re: [css-sizing] min-content for replaced elements with an aspect ratio

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:39:22 -0800
To: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>, Christian Biesinger <cbiesinger@google.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, Manuel Rego Casasnovas <rego@igalia.com>
Message-ID: <56ABEA1A.7000409@inkedblade.net>
On 01/27/2016 12:07 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote:
> On 01/27/2016 11:51 AM, Christian Biesinger wrote:
>> Oh. I hadn't actually tested it, this was based on an email
>> conversation I had with Rego... I assume Gecko would also resolve it
>> to 60px for a flexbox min-width: auto?
> We should, but we don't right now (we resolve it to 100px).
> Testcase for that:
>   https://jsfiddle.net/t9Laskra/1/
> I believe that's because the min-width:auto spec text about "transferred
> size" has changed during the time since I resurrected Firefox's
> 'min-width:auto' implementation.  IIRC, it used to require that the
> transferred size would trump the min-content size (and make the image
> wider than its intrinsic size) -- but it no longer does.

Eh? Was that an intentional change to the spec? o_O

*really needs to rewrite this section, it's nearly incomprehensible*

Received on Monday, 1 February 2016 02:49:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:00 UTC