- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 19:30:24 -0800
- To: Mats Palmgren <mats@mozilla.com>, www-style@w3.org
On 01/07/2016 12:04 PM, Mats Palmgren wrote: > On 12/10/2015 23:18, fantasai wrote: >> This is a bug in the spec. :( We've fixed it as follows: >> # If the track has an ''auto'' <a>min track sizing function</a>, >> # set its <a>base size</a> to the maximum of its items’ “min-size >> # contributions”: the value specified by its respective 'min-width' >> # or 'min-height' properties (whichever matches the relevant axis) >> # if the specified size is ''auto'', or else the item’s <a>min-content >> # contribution</a>. >> >> Let us know if this is clear, or if there remains any ambiguity >> or error. > > Hmm, so the above change makes Grid chapter 4.4 obsolete, right? > https://drafts.csswg.org/css-grid/#min-size-auto No. > If not, please describe in detail in which situations the spec text > in 4.4 applies. In the case that the specified size of the grid item is 'auto', then the value of 'min-width' will control what its contribution to the base track size computation is. If 'min-width: auto', then the grid item contributes its min-content size. If 'min-width' is something else (e.g. zero) then it contribute that value instead. If all items in a grid track have 'width: auto; min-width: auto' then an 'auto' track size will result in the same base track size as 'min-content'. If all items in a grid track have 'width: auto; min-width: 0', then an 'auto' track size will result in a base track size of 0. Furthermore, 'min-width: auto' items with a specified width less than their min-content size will be treated as contributing their specified width to an 'auto' track, not their min-content size. (If the min-width or track size was min-content, then they would instead contribute their min-content size.) ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 21 January 2016 03:30:58 UTC