@@ -37,8 +37,9 @@ Proposal:
3737 said element may become narrower."
3838
3939Resolution:
40+ Proposal accepted.
4041
41- =dbaron= Propose text .
42+ =Bert= Edit .
4243------------------------------------------------------------------------
4344Issue 3.
4445URI: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Sep/0065.html
@@ -65,14 +66,20 @@ Description:
6566
6667Proposal:
6768
68- Leave spec as-is and continue with image-scaling in CSS3.
69+ Leave spec as-is and continue with image-scaling in CSS3. Add note:
70+
71+ Note: In cases where an explicit width or height is set and the other
72+ dimension is auto, applying a minimum or maximum constraint on the
73+ auto side causes an over-constrained situation. The spec is clear in
74+ the behavior but it might not be what the author expects. The CSS3
75+ image-fit property can be used to obtain different results in this
76+ situation.
6977
7078Resolution:
7179
7280 No normative change, add warning note to authors.
7381
74- =Markus= Draft note about interoperability troubles and discouraging authors
75- from using this corner case.
82+ =Bert= Edit.
7683------------------------------------------------------------------------
7784Issue 5.
7885URI: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Nov/0049.html
@@ -651,24 +658,11 @@ Original proposal from MS:
651658
652659Alternate proposal from Hyatt:
653660
654- Change the following in section 9.5.2:
655-
656- "If the element's top border edge has not passed the relevant floats, then
657- its clearance is set to the amount necessary to place the border edge of
658- the block even with the bottom outer edge of the lowest float that must be
659- cleared."
661+ http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2007JanMar/0512.html
660662
661- to :
663+ Alternate proposal from Ian :
662664
663- "If the element's top border edge has not passed the relevant floats, then
664- its clearance is set to the amount necessary to place the border edge of
665- the block even with the bottom outer edge of the lowest float that must be
666- cleared. The space consumed by the previous collapsed margins, the
667- clearance, and the collapsed margins between the clearance and the border
668- edge of the block cannot be less than the space that would have been
669- consumed by all of the collapsed margins up to the border edge of the block
670- if no clearance had occurred. The clearance is increased such that the two
671- distances match when this situation occurs."
665+ http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2007JanMar/0535.html
672666
673667Alternate proposal from Ian/Elika:
674668 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2007JanMar/0538.html
@@ -769,6 +763,9 @@ David's Proposal:
769763Ian Agrees:
770764 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2007Apr/0014
771765
772- =WG= Discuss.
766+ Resolution:
767+ Proposal accepted.
768+
769+ =Bert= Edit.
773770
774771------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 commit comments