You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
[css-values-5] Move calc-size() to css-sizing-4? #14502
The CSSWG will automatically accept this resolution one week from now if no objections are raised here. Anyone can add an emoji to this comment to express support. If you do not support this resolution, please add a new comment.
Proposed Resolution: Move calc-size() to css-sizing-4
@dbaron I think from an implementor point of view that might make sense, since they're both defining computation trees... but from an author point of view, it fits with the rest of the sizing values imho.
I don't have a particularly strong opinion on where it lives, but I do agree that having calc-size() and interpolate-size living in Sizing makes sense. Yeah, it reuses some calculation-tree terminology, but I don't think that strictly means it has to live in the same spec as calc(), which is a more general-purpose mathematical value.
The CSSWG will automatically accept this resolution one week from now if no objections are raised here. Anyone can add an emoji to this comment to express support. If you do not support this resolution, please add a new comment.
Proposed Resolution: Move calc-size() and interpolate-size to css-sizing-4
Activity
astearns commentedon Sep 28, 2026
The CSSWG will automatically accept this resolution one week from now if no objections are raised here. Anyone can add an emoji to this comment to express support. If you do not support this resolution, please add a new comment.
Proposed Resolution: Move calc-size() to css-sizing-4
dbaron commentedon Sep 30, 2026
I presume you're talking about moving all of https://drafts.csswg.org/css-values-5/#calc-size including the definition of
interpolate-size?I guess I have some mixed feelings about this since I think it also makes some sense for it to live near
calc(). I'm curious what @tabatkins thinks.(Also note the resolution to put in css-values-5 was #626 (comment) .)
fantasai commentedon Oct 7, 2026
@dbaron I think from an implementor point of view that might make sense, since they're both defining computation trees... but from an author point of view, it fits with the rest of the sizing values imho.
astearns commentedon Oct 7, 2026
Let’s wait on the agenda tag until you two agree. We don’t need to decide on this until we have a publishing event.
tabatkins commentedon Oct 7, 2026
I don't have a particularly strong opinion on where it lives, but I do agree that having calc-size() and interpolate-size living in Sizing makes sense. Yeah, it reuses some calculation-tree terminology, but I don't think that strictly means it has to live in the same spec as calc(), which is a more general-purpose mathematical value.
dbaron commentedon Oct 8, 2026
OK, I'm ok with moving to sizing as long as
calc-size()andinterpolate-sizestay together.astearns commentedon Oct 19, 2026
The CSSWG will automatically accept this resolution one week from now if no objections are raised here. Anyone can add an emoji to this comment to express support. If you do not support this resolution, please add a new comment.
Proposed Resolution: Move calc-size() and interpolate-size to css-sizing-4
astearns commentedon Oct 26, 2026
RESOLVED: Move calc-size() and interpolate-size to css-sizing-4
[css-sizing-4][css-values-5] Move calc-size() and interpolate-size to…