Support fit-content for preferred size, min size, and max size. This
patch only implement the style system. For layout part, we will do that
in the following patches.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D107161
This patch has no functional change beyond changing prototypes and
adding storage for ImageIntRegion for each ImageContainer.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D114984
This should be mostly straight-forward, since we have code for this
anyways for image-set() and srcset.
The only thing is that we were using floats for resolution, but since
EXIF allows you to scale each axis separately, we now need to pass an
image::Resolution instead.
The main outstanding issue is the spec comment mentioned in the previous
patch, about what happens if you have srcset/image-set and the image
density specified together. For now I've implemented what the
image-set() spec says, but this is subject to change before shipping of
course.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D113265
This should be mostly straight-forward, since we have code for this
anyways for image-set() and srcset.
The only thing is that we were using floats for resolution, but since
EXIF allows you to scale each axis separately, we now need to pass an
image::Resolution instead.
The main outstanding issue is the spec comment mentioned in the previous
patch, about what happens if you have srcset/image-set and the image
density specified together. For now I've implemented what the
image-set() spec says, but this is subject to change before shipping of
course.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D113265
https://drafts.csswg.org/css-images-4/#image-set-notation has:
> [...] it also specifies the image’s natural resolution, overriding any other
> source of data that might supply a natural resolution.
Astounding that there was literally no WPT for this at all. I added three: one
for backgrounds, one for list-style-image, and one for `content`. Cursor is not
handled on this patch because that one requires a fair amount of extra work.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D112474
This will prevent growing them when introducing fit-content(<length>).
This can _almost_ be derived, if it wasn't because of the quirky stuff.
I think the macro is probably good enough for now but let me know if you
disagree.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D106713
This will prevent growing them when introducing fit-content(<length>).
This can _almost_ be derived, if it wasn't because of the quirky stuff.
I think the macro is probably good enough for now but let me know if you
disagree.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D106713
This patch adds the struct as a parameter to various functions.
The struct is cached in ReflowInput so that we don't need to pass it
down to the internal method where nsIFrame::ComputeSize() is called.
In the subsequent patches, we'll use it to revise the implementation of
flex container's flex base size resolution, and size overrides.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D101793
This patch adds the struct as a parameter to various functions.
The struct is cached in ReflowInput so that we don't need to pass it
down to the internal method where nsIFrame::ComputeSize() is called.
In the subsequent patches, we'll use it to revise the implementation of
flex container's flex base size resolution, and size overrides.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D101793
This patch adds the struct as a parameter to various functions.
The struct is cached in ReflowInput so that we don't need to pass it
down to the internal method where nsIFrame::ComputeSize() is called.
In the subsequent patches, we'll use it to revise the implementation of
flex container's flex base size resolution, and size overrides.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D101793
Based on the spec, if the aspect-ratio property value is:
1) auto: we should always use content-box dimensions.
2) <ratio>: the aspect-ratio works with box sizing dimensions.
3) auto && <ratio>: we use content-box dimensions in all cases.
So we need an extra flag to address that we should use box-sizing or
always use content-box dimensions while computing the size in
ratio-dependent axis.
This also updates some wpts for non-replaced elements because we should
use content-box if aspect-ratio is 'auto && <ratio>'.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D100072
Precomputing the skipBEnd bit is odd / wrong. Using the PreReflow
version causes no regression, and allows us to simplify the code.
It also reverts the test annotations added to bug 1675376 which were
caused by the extra argument to GetLogicalSkipSides() somehow.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D97418
Precomputing the skipBEnd bit is odd / wrong. Using the PreReflow
version causes no regression, and allows us to simplify the code.
It also reverts the test annotations added to bug 1675376 which were
caused by the extra argument to GetLogicalSkipSides() somehow.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D97418
Both are aliases to IntrinsicISizeType::MinISize and
IntrinsicISizeType::PrefISize.
Remove MOZ_ASSERT in nsLayoutUtils::IntrinsicForAxis and
nsContainerFrame::DoInlineIntrinsicISize since IntrinsicISizeType is a
enum class nowadays, which cannot have other values.
I've compiled this patch with DEBUG_INTRINSIC_WIDTH defined in
nsLayoutUtils.cpp, and fixed aWM undefined in
nsLayoutUtils::MinSizeContributionForAxis().
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D94618
This patch moves the preferred aspect-ratio calculation from each
replaced elements' GetIntrinicRatio() into GetAspectRatio(), because
they share the same logic.
For nsImageFrame, the cached mIntrinsicRatio now stores only the image's
intrinsic ratio, not considering the aspect-ratio property.
This patch fixed "object-fit:contain" for canvas, image because
GetIntrinicRatio() no longer considers aspect-ratio. This also fixed
replaced elements' size when both "aspect-ratio:<ratio>" and
"contain:size" is specified.
This also makes us pass some of the aspect-ratio tests because we change
GetIntrinicRatio() into GetAspectRatio() in
nsLayoutUtils::IntrinsicForAxis() in Part5, which is used by nsBlockFrame
(via nsLayoutUtils::IntrinsicForContainer) to implement GetMinISize().
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D91229
For now, GetAspectRatio() is just an alias for GetIntrinicRatio(). In
Part 7, we're going to have GetAspectRatio() consider aspect-ratio
property so that each replaced elements only need to report their
intrinsic ratio via GetIntrinicRatio(). Non-replaced element can also
call GetAspectRatio() to get the ratio suitable to calculate layout
size.
As of this patch, all the replaced elements'
GetIntrinsicRatio() (including nsImageFrame::mIntrinsicRatio) consider
aspect-ratio properties (added in bug 1639963). This is wrong, because
it affects replaced element's content ratio. So we adapt only callers
[1] involving the computation of the frame's external sizes to retain
the behavior after Part 7.
This change shouldn't change behavior.
[1] Exceptions include 1) a caller in nsIFrame::ComputeSize() checking
the frame has no intrinsic ratio; 2) other frame classes implementing
nsIFrame::GetIntrinsicRatio() by calling their parent's
GetIntrinicRatio(). nsSubDocumentFrame::GetIntrinicRatio() is an
example.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D91227
Flex item's intrinsic size can affect the content size suggestion in the
automatic minimum size resolution, so we shouldn't optimize the reflow
away. https://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox-1/#min-size-auto
Add `IsFlexItem()` condition to the methods to avoid set
`IMAGE_SIZECONSTRAINED` bit in `nsImageFrame::Reflow()`. So after
decoding the image and updating its intrinsic size, we'll reflow the
flex item again.
This is needed to pass
testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-flexbox/flex-minimum-width-flex-items-013.html
after updating specified / content size suggestion in a later part.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D90453
Also combine the border and padding arguments for
nsContainerFrame::ComputeSizeWithIntrinsicDimensions(), too. This method
is used as a helper to implement ComputeSize() for various replaced
elements. Its callers are all within nsIFrame's derived classes'
overridden methods, so I'm not bothering to convert them in a separate
patch.
This change shouldn't change behavior.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D90064
Per spec we shouldn't behave differently depending on how we blocked the
image/object/etc.
This may have made sense in the past when ad blockers were implemented
via nsIContentPolicy, but I think nowadays it doesn't make sense, and
showing fallback is preferred.
There's a couple extra cleanups we can do after this lands, like
removing HTMLImageElement.imageBlockingStatus and simplifying a bit that
code. But I'll do that in a separate bug.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D89912
Per spec we shouldn't behave differently depending on how we blocked the
image/object/etc.
This may have made sense in the past when ad blockers were implemented
via nsIContentPolicy, but I think nowadays it doesn't make sense, and
showing fallback is preferred.
There's a couple extra cleanups we can do after this lands, like
removing HTMLImageElement.imageBlockingStatus and simplifying a bit that
code. But I'll do that in a separate bug.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D89912
We treat it exactly the same as -moz-broken. The pseudo-class is not
exposed to content, so I don't think we have a reason to keep it around.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D89904
In order to apply Automatic content-based minimum sizes, we have to know
the content size on the block axis. We cannot get the content size until
we finish the reflow of the child frames. So we have to keep a flag
which indicates the size of the ratio-dependent axis is overrideen by
aspect-ratio in ReflowInput.
We will set the correct return value in the next patch, For now, we
always return AspectRatioUsage::None.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D79335
