We were incorrectly returning a "specified size suggestion" for flex
items with a definite main size where that main size was also automatic.
This led to us incorrectly choosing 0 as the automatic minimum size for
that flex item, instead of its min-content size.
The main differences between our current implementation and the spec
are:
* The title element need not be a child of the head element.
* If the title element does not exist, the default value should be
the empty string - we currently return a null string.
* We've since added AOs for several of the spec steps here, so we
do not need to implement those steps inline.
The implementations are correct as-is. The spec comments are mostly to
help point out that an upcoming getter (the title element) is currently
accessed incorrectly. It is currently implemented like the head element
and searches the "expected" parent head element for its first title
element; instead it should search the document itself. This incorrect
behavior becomes clearer if all of these elements have spec comments.
Adds a second pass to resolve percentage paddings and margins of grid
items after track sizes are known. If resolving percentage paddings
or margins affects tracks sizes then second pass to re-resolve track
sizes might also be needed but I cannot come up with an example to
reproduce that so we can leave it to improve in the future :)
This fixes the issue when functions that distribute base_size
or growth_limit to tracks only considered *affected* spanned tracks
while calculating left extra that is available for distribution while
indeed it should be just *all* spanned track by specific item that
extra space size.
This fixes the issue that currently we use "auto" as initial value for
grid-template-column and grid-template-rows although spec says it
should be "none". This makes a lot of difference for these properties
because currently we represent "auto" as a list with one auto-sized
track which means initial value for grid-template-column defines one
"explicit" track while it should define none of them.
This change makes grid-auto-columns/rows be applied to the correct
tracks when initial values is used for grid-template-column/rows.
This changes grid items position storage type from unsigned to signed
integer so it can represent negative offsets and also updates placement
for grid items with specified column to correctly handle negative
offsets.
CSS text-shadow is an inherited property, so we have to make sure it's
part of the inherited substructure in ComputedValues, otherwise it gets
incorrectly reset in children.
This fixes an issue where images with padding and/or border did not have
their size adjusted for `border-box`, thereby becoming larger than
intended by the author.
If a box has a negative margin-left, it may have a negative effective
offset within its parent BFC root coordinate system.
We can account for this when calculating the amount of left-side float
intrusion by flooring the X offset at 0.
Wrap the parsing of numbers, integers, and dimensions in a transaction,
which we only commit if that parsed value was actually accepted by the
property.
This fixes `font: 0/0 a;` failing to parse.
To abort the processing of any nested invocations of the tokenizer,
just return is enough in this case.
During the process of pending parsing blocking script, the
is_ready_to_be_parser_executed() check should be applied on the
blocking script, not the original script.
The spec for the `<use>` element requires a shadow tree for the
rendered content, so we need to be able to escape shadow trees when
rendering svg content.
This makes it possible to set a pseudo-element as the inspected node
using Document::set_inspected_node(), Document then provides
inspected_layout_node() for the painting related functions.
These markers are rendered as equilateral triangles pointing right and
down respectively. As we currently don't implement writing-mode the
closed marker does not respect it.
...except those related to `grid`, because I can't figure out how the 17
different properties interact with each other, and what values apply to
which ones. 😅
All but 1 of these are the infinite range `[-∞,∞]`. As such, specifying
that range does not change anything, but it does make it explicit that
we've looked at what the range should be, instead of just not having
added it.
Now that we have a way to resolve calc() lengths without a layout node,
we can finally support calc() values in font-size.
This wasn't possible before because font-related properties have to be
resolved eagerly in StyleComputer due to font-relative CSS length units
depending on the computed font being known.
