- From: josh on <josh@theyrule.net>
- Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 18:02:00 +0000
- To: Xidorn Quan <quanxunzhen@gmail.com>, josh on <josh@theyrule.net>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 15 March 2016 18:02:39 UTC
"This won't work in general, as it introduces cyclic dependency. The dimensions of a parent could be affected by its descendants." Is that not the same as the percent unit? http://codepen.io/joshon/pen/PNbaaY Could it not be handled in the same way? I am probably missing something here. Josh On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 7:49 PM Xidorn Quan <quanxunzhen@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 6:21 AM, josh on <josh@theyrule.net> wrote: > >> Proposed solution: >> %w, %h >> Where 50%w is 50% of the offsetWidth of the offsetParent, and 50%h is 50% >> of the offsetHeight of the offsetParent. >> >> To maintain a div at 16:9 you could use the style: >> >> .video-wrap { >> width: 100%w; >> height: 56.25%w; >> max-width: 177%h; >> max-height: 100%h; >> } >> >> I hope this is a helpful contribution, my apologies if it is not. >> > > This won't work in general, as it introduces cyclic dependency. The > dimensions of a parent could be affected by its descendants. > > It could probably work if the "parent" has layout containment. > > Do we have a concept for elements with layout containment? Probably we > could call it layout container or something? > > - Xidorn >
Received on Tuesday, 15 March 2016 18:02:39 UTC