Re: [css-sizing] definite sizes and shrink-wrapping

On 05/05/2016 12:02 PM, Christian Biesinger wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> this is sort of an extension of Rego's recent email
> (https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016May/0026.html) and
> based on IRC conversation with dbaron.
>
> This is the relevant part of css-sizing:
> https://drafts.csswg.org/css-sizing/#definite
>
> It says "A size that can be determined without measuring content"
>
> Clearly shrinkwrapped elements' size does require measuring content,
> by definition.
>
> But per David, and per interoperable implementations, widths are
> always definite, even when shrinkwrapping. Now, the spec as written
> allows for shrinkwrapping of abspos (though I believe earlier advice
> on this list was that this should be limited to abspos that specifies
> size in some way). But it does not address floats, which also
> shrinkwrap, or flex items, or I'm sure other cases.
>
> Can we clarify this part of the spec?
>
> (CSS2.1 explicitly leaves this case undefined)

The CSSWG discussed this last week and decided to update the definition
of definite/indefinite so that intrinsic sizes are considered definite:
   https://www.w3.org/2016/05/09-css-irc#T21-51-29

I'm not 100% sure what exactly this means, but we tried to make edits
to CSS Sizing to match the resolution:
   https://hg.csswg.org/drafts/rev/b7b26d2bc943
and added a clarification to Sizing L4
   https://hg.csswg.org/drafts/rev/1c734ff12cc4

We'd appreciate it if people reviewed the change and let us know if
   a) It's correct
   b) There are further edits that need to be made, either to Sizing
      or Flexbox or Grid or anything else
   c) If we should copy the second changeset to Sizing 3, given it
      defines intrinsic sizes like this:
        https://www.w3.org/TR/css-sizing-3/#intrinsic-contribution
   d) If there's anything else that needs fixing

~fantasai and TJ

Received on Tuesday, 17 May 2016 18:58:00 UTC