[css-sizing] Apply the resolution about 'height:stretch' acting like 'align-self:stretch' when possible, and remove the corresponding Extrinsic Sizing section.

Author: tabatkins

css-sizing-3/Overview.bs

@@ -245,21 +245,32 @@ New Sizing Keywords</h2>
 New Keywords for 'width' and 'height'</h3>
 
 	<pre class=propdef partial>
-	Name: width, min-width, max-width, height, min-height, max-height
+	Name: width, max-width, height, max-height
 	New values: stretch | max-content | min-content | fit-content | fit-content(<<length-percentage>>)
 	</pre>
 
+	<pre class=propdef partial>
+	Name: min-width, min-height
+	New values: max-content | min-content
+	</pre>
+
 	<p>There are four types of automatically-determined sizes in CSS (which
 		are represented in the width and height properties by the keywords
 		defined above):
 
 	<dl dfn-type=value dfn-for="width, min-width, max-width, height, min-height, max-height">
-		<dt><dfn>stretch</dfn>
+		<dt><dfn for="width, max-width, height, max-height">stretch</dfn>
 		<dd>
-			Use the <a>stretch-fit inline size</a> or <a>stretch-fit block size</a>,
-			as appropriate to the writing mode.
-
-			NOTE: This is the formula used to calculate ''width/auto'' widths
+			If 'align-self' or 'justify-self' (as appropriate to the relevant axis)
+			is defined to apply,
+			size the box as if ''align-self/stretch'' were specified for that property.
+			(If the box does not exactly fill its <a>alignment container</a>,
+			the <a>alignment properties</a> will dictate how the size differential is handled.)
+			Otherwise,
+			this value behaves as the initial value.
+
+			NOTE: For the <a>inline size</a> of a <a>block-level box</a>,
+			this is exactly the formula used to calculate ''width/auto'' widths
 			for non-replaced blocks in normal flow, see <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visudet.html#blockwidth">CSS2.1§10.3.3</a>.
 			It allows re-using this formula for boxes that are otherwise shrink-wrapped,
 			like tables.
@@ -455,35 +466,10 @@ Extrinsic Size Determination</h2>
 <h3 id="stretch-fit-sizing">
 Stretch-fit Sizing</h3>
 
-		The inner <a>stretch-fit inline size</a> of a box is&hellip;
-
-		<!-- Based on https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Nov/0286.html -->
-
-		<ul>
-			<li>
-				If the box is the root or is absolutely-positioned, the inline-size of its containing block, else
-			<li>
-				<code>max('min-inline-size'|0, min('max-inline-size'|infinity, 'inline-size'|<a>stretch-fit inline size</a>))</code>
-				where the sizes are inner inline-sizes of the element establishing the box's <a>containing block</a>,
-				and where the first value is used if it is <a>definite</a> and the second value otherwise.
-		</ul>
+	The inner <a>stretch-fit inline size</a> of a box is&hellip;
 
 
-		&hellip;less the box's <a>inline-axis</a> margins
-		(after any <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/box.html#collapsing-margins">margin collapsing</a>, and treating ''margin/auto'' margins as zero),
-		borders, and padding,
-		flooring at zero.
 
-		Issue: Shouldn't this be ignoring margin collapsing?
-
-	<p>
-		The <a>stretch-fit block size</a> of a box is defined analogously,
-		but in the other dimension.
-
-	<p class='issue'>
-		This definition might end up skipping further up the ancestor chain than we'd like in some cases.
-		<a href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Oct/0204.html">Example.</a>
-		Maybe it should stop at each formatting root, or something similar?
 
 <h3 id="percentage-sizing">
 	Percentage Sizing</h3>
@@ -515,7 +501,7 @@ Stretch-fit Sizing</h3>
 		a 'block-size' or 'max-block-size' on the containing block
 		that causes it to depend on the size of its contents,
 		the box’s percentage is not resolved and instead <a>behaves as auto</a>.
-		
+
 		Note: <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/css-grid/">Grid containers</a> (<a href="https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1679">and flex items?</a>) do allow percentages to resolve in this case.
 
 	* Otherwise, the percentage is resolved against the containing block’s size.
@@ -555,7 +541,7 @@ Stretch-fit Sizing</h3>
 		for resolving the <code>&lt;aside></code>,
 		whose width resolves to half that of the <code>&lt;article></code>.
 	</div>
-  
+
 	<div class="example">
 		In this example,
 
@@ -567,7 +553,7 @@ Stretch-fit Sizing</h3>
 				<section style="height: 30px;"></section>
 			</article>
 		</xmp>
-		
+
 		because the percentage <a>block size</a> ('height', in this case) on block-level elements
 		is defined to not resolve inside content-sized containing blocks,
 		the percentage height on the <code>&lt;aside></code> is ignored,
@@ -577,9 +563,9 @@ Stretch-fit Sizing</h3>
 	<div class=example>
 		Issue: Letting %s still resolve against a definite 'height'
 		when the min-height is intrinsic is an open issue.
-		(CSS2 has a general statement about "height depending on contents", 
-		which this technically is, 
-		even though CSS2 didn't have content-dependent keywords for 'min-height'. 
+		(CSS2 has a general statement about "height depending on contents",
+		which this technically is,
+		even though CSS2 didn't have content-dependent keywords for 'min-height'.
 		Since this is new, we think we could have this different behavior.)
 
 		The following examples illustrate how block-axis percentages resolve against a containing block whose size depends on its contents.