Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Jump to bottom

[css-align] align-self / justify-self on abspos elements isn't back compatible? #7599

Open
bfgeek opened this issue Aug 12, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

[css-align] align-self / justify-self on abspos elements isn't back compatible? #7599

bfgeek opened this issue Aug 12, 2022 · 4 comments
Labels
Closed Accepted by CSSWG Resolution Commenter Response Pending css-align-3 Current Work
Projects
TPAC Friday 2022 October 26 meeting

Comments

@bfgeek
Copy link

bfgeek commented Aug 12, 2022 •
edited

Consider:

<div style="direction: ltr; width: 100px; border: solid lime 3px; position: relative;">
  <div style="direction: rtl; margin: 20px; border: solid hotpink 3px;">
    <img style="position: absolute; width: 10px; height: 10px; background: cornflowerblue;">
  </div>
</div>

https://drafts.csswg.org/css-align-3/#justify-abspos

justify-self Axis | The block’s containing block’s inline axis.

Today the static-pos of will be on the right - however I think what the current spec text is suggesting is that it'd be on the left? I.e. justify-self:auto -> justify-self:normal -> justify-self:start

I suspect this isn't intentional - likely "normal" needs to be interpreted as what the natural alignment of the static-pos rect is.

cc/ @tabatkins @fantasai
@bfgeek bfgeek added the css-align-3 Current Work label Aug 12, 2022
@tabatkins
Copy link
Member

This appears to be pretty much undefined, afaict. While we specify the axis that the property operates in, we don't specify what writing mode/etc the staticpos rectangle uses. I think it's reasonable for it to take its directions from the parent, yeah - that matches the "what it would do if it wasn't positioned" intention. The fact that we have backcompat on that behavior just makes the answer obvious.

@fantasai
Copy link
Collaborator

justify-self: start is defined to use the writing mode of the container: https://www.w3.org/TR/css-align-3/#positional-values

I think it's good to bring this up though: for static positioning, we probably want to use the writing mode of the static position containing block to resolve both the directions and the axes. (That'll also solve our backwards-compat concerns with Flexbox in a self-consistent way.)

@astearns astearns added this to 11:45-12:30 in TPAC Friday 2022 Sep 11, 2022
@atanassov atanassov added this to 1st hour in October 26 meeting Oct 18, 2022
@css-meeting-bot
Copy link
Member

The CSS Working Group just discussed [css-align] align-self / justify-self on abspos elements isn't back compatible?, and agreed to the following:

  • RESOLVED: Use the writing mode of the parent's formatting context for staticpos
  • RESOLVED: Align justify axis of non staticpos use writing mode of their containing block
The full IRC log of that discussion <dael> Topic: [css-align] align-self / justify-self on abspos elements isn't back compatible?
<dael> github: https://github.com//issues/7599
<dael> fantasai: This is how do we resolve the axis it operates in. When staticpos we use axis as defined by the formatting context, the parent formatting context
<dael> fantasai: I think we can resolve on that and then address what to do for non-staticpos
<dael> astearns: Prop: Use the writing mode of the parent's formatting context for staticpos
<dael> astearns: Sounds like that's what we need for web compat?
<dael> iank_: I don't have data but I would wager people are relying on this working as is
<dael> astearns: Obj?
<dael> RESOLVED: Use the writing mode of the parent's formatting context for staticpos
<dael> fantasai: Follow-up for non staticpos. Spec says for abspos you resolve justify and align based on containing block's writing mode. Rather than checking parent. Reason is pulling from deeper context and trying to layout with other things should use same reference axis
<dael> fantasai: That's why we defined it that way. Is that fine or do something different?
<dael> iank_: Broadly fine. For clarification if you've got a line item on containing block does that effect out of flow element?
<dael> fantasai: If out of flow is not staticpos it does not look at align items on anything
<dael> iank_: Makes sense
<dael> iank_: The quirk that falls out is align-self:center if you're staticpos in one axis and not in the other axis it will effect both axis
<dael> fantasai: Yeah. I think it's a little weird but anything else is weirder in more common cases
<dael> iank_: Yeah, fine with that.
<dael> fantasai: Align justify axis of non staticposuse writing mode of their containing block
<dael> RESOLVED: Align justify axis of non staticpos use writing mode of their containing block
<dael> iank_: Clarification- when doing this you need to say staticpos in a particular axis
<dael> fantasai: Yeah

@mozilla-apprentice mozilla-apprentice mentioned this issue Nov 2, 2022
Open
fantasai added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 19, 2023
@fantasai
[css-align-3][css-position-3] Clarify axes/directions/references of a…
29e253d 
…lignment properties for static positioning #7599 #7612
@fantasai
Copy link
Collaborator

@bfgeek We've completed the edits for this add #7612 ; Let us know if anything still needs fixing?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Closed Accepted by CSSWG Resolution Commenter Response Pending css-align-3 Current Work
Projects
No open projects
October 26 meeting
Layout
TPAC Friday 2022
11:45-12:30
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
5 participants
@tabatkins @fantasai @bfgeek @astearns @css-meeting-bot