LGTM1; thanks for following up on all of the dangling threads here.
On Tuesday, August 26, 2025 at 2:06:26 AM UTC-7 [email protected]
wrote:
Hi Mike,
I followed the current pattern of adding resolutions/annotations
in SVG2.0 draft.
For example, if you see the annotation in Document Structure — SVG
2 <https://www.w3.org/TR/SVG2/struct.html#SVGElement>, my PR
change will look identical to that. I believe any newly made
resolutions are mainly in non-normative note/form because SVG2.0
is still in draft mode. I wanted to maintain the current structure
so I kept the resolution in this form.
As for the linked irc log, they take a little time to load but
they should be viewable irc.w3.org #css
<https://logs.csswg.org/irc.w3.org/css/2025-08-21/#e1716969>
With Regards
Divyansh
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Mike Taylor <[email protected]>
*Sent:* Tuesday, August 26, 2025 14:17
*To:* Divyansh Mangal <[email protected]>; Domenic Denicola
<[email protected]>
*Cc:* blink-dev <[email protected]>; Chris Harrelson
<[email protected]>; [email protected]
<[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [blink-dev] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Intent to Ship:
Support width and height as presentation attributes on nested
<svg> elements
Is the PR supposed to document the normative requirements of the
WG resolution? Right now it appears to be a non-normative note
that links to some IRC logs (which don't load for me, but that's
probably my fault somehow).
On 8/25/25 3:17 p.m., 'Divyansh Mangal' via blink-dev wrote:
Hi Domenic, yes, all the points that you mentioned are correct
and describe the current state of the I2S perfectly.
As for the plans of merging the CSS resolution in a spec, we
have already started the communications with relevant people
and on that front, we are expected to edit the resolution in
the SVG2.0 specification - Geometry Properties — SVG 2
<https://svgwg.org/svg2-draft/geometry.html#Sizing>.
I have taken on the responsibility of making the edit myself
and have raised a PR to achieve that:
Adding resolution of content dependent units used in sizing
properties for inner SVG elements by goldenboy777 · Pull
Request #999 · w3c/svgwg <https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/pull/999>
I would like to point that the SVG spec is currently not
maintained very actively, in fact there are talks of even
publishing the draft SVG2.0 or respec it, so I expect a delay
in getting the above PR actually merged. I also lack certain
permissions to add the reviewers currently.
(For more details, please follow the conversations in the
public email list [email protected] from July to September
2025: by date
<https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2025JulSep/>)
Given the time invested in this I2S already and the above
raised spec PR, I think it would be ok to move forward with
this intent. Let me know your thoughts here, or if you have
any questions.
With Regards
Divyansh
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Domenic Denicola <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Friday, August 22, 2025 10:19
*To:* Divyansh Mangal <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Cc:* blink-dev <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]
<[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>; Chris
Harrelson <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]
<[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>;
[email protected] <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [blink-dev] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Intent to Ship:
Support width and height as presentation attributes on nested
<svg> elements
Divyansh and I discussed this a bit more over Slack. In
addition to what they wrote, let me confirm:
* What they implemented and are proposing to ship in this
Intent is fully aligned with the CSSWG resolution
* There are full WPTs for what they implemented and are
proposing to ship
* Additionally, the CSSWG resolution contained more change
suggestions in this area ("defaulting of content based
keywords as auto")
o This intent does not cover those additional changes,
and does not change the behavior of those cases. (That
is, there is no risk of going current_behavior ->
behavior_after_I2S ->
third_behavior_implementing_CSSWG_resolution.)
o There are WPTs for these cases, which Chromium is
currently failing.
o In the future, Divyansh hopes to work on those
additional changes as well.
So, I agree that this feature is basically ready to ship.
However, it'd be ideal if we had clarity on how the CSSWG
plans to move from a "Needs Edits" resolution to merged spec
text somewhere. So, I'll refrain from giving the LGTM for a
few more days to see if there's any progress on that front.
On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 1:23 AM 'Divyansh Mangal' via
blink-dev <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi all, I have added more WPTs to increase the interop
coverage as per the discussion in the CSSWG issue
<https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12376>.
These are the WPT PRs that got merged to achieve that:
WPTs for different CSS values of `width` and `height` for
SVG elements by goldenboy777 · Pull Request #53186 ·
web-platform-tests/wpt
<https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/53186>
Update viewport-units related test cases for nested `svg`
element by goldenboy777 · Pull Request #54128 ·
web-platform-tests/wpt
<https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/54128/files>
Furthermore, we have gotten feedback from the CSSWG chairs
on the CSSWG issue
<https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12376>, they
have also given the resolution on content-based keywords
like min-content, max-content which WebKit
<https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/509>earlier
pointed out as ambiguous. There was more feedback for the
viewport units, and we plan to follow them with the SVG WG
group (once that gets reconstituted).
Given that the main issue which Webkit pointed out earlier
has been resolved and we are achieving a good coverage of
interop with the wpts. I feel it is safe to move forwards
with shipping this in chrome (and edge). Let me know your
thoughts here, or if you have any questions.
with Regards
Divyansh
On Thursday, July 31, 2025 at 7:45:06 AM UTC+5:30
[email protected] wrote:
I was about to LGTM this, noting that you've done a
great job with test coverage, and we've given over a
month for the CSSWG to come to a conclusion but not
seen much movement.
But then I noticed that 16 hours ago, a Firefox
engineer has chimed in on the CSSWG thread
<https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12376#issuecomment-3135649756>,
and sounds interested in collaborating toward interop
on this issue.
I don't think we should hold up this intent much
longer, but let's take advantage of this to try to get
more signals from Firefox. I'll add my thoughts to
that thread to try to help things along.
On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 2:45 PM 'Divyansh Mangal' via
blink-dev <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
Hello everyone, as per one of the API Owner's
suggestions we have introduced more WPTs to
increase the coverage of different CSS values of
width and height properties. The PR
https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/53186
<https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/53186>
is also merged now.
Also, some amount of discussion is already started
on the CSS issue
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12376
<https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12376> and
only the conclusion from the CSSWG is still pending.
I am requesting a re-review of this I2S to let us
know if more work needs to be done.
with Regards
Divyansh
On Wednesday, July 9, 2025 at 8:41:51 PM UTC+5:30
Chris Harrelson wrote:
On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 1:21 AM Yoav Weiss
(@Shopify) <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks for working on these!!
+Vladimir Levin +Chris Harrelson - what
would it take to add these to the CSSWG
agenda? (and maybe get eyes on the WPT review)
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12376
<https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12376> has
the Agenda+ label, so it'll get discussed soon.
On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 8:02 AM 'Divyansh
Mangal' via blink-dev
<[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Dominic, we have incorporated few
of the action items that you
suggested. Specially the priority ones:
I have created a WPT PR to increase
the coverage of different values of
width and height CSS properties
https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/53186
<https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/53186>.
I have also started a CSS
issue
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12376
<https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12376>
where we are clarifying and getting
opinions on what should happen with
the undefined values in the SVG
specification.
On Friday, June 13, 2025 at
10:18:41 PM UTC+5:30 Divyansh Mangal
wrote:
Hi Dominic, thanks for your
suggestions in the I2S
As suggested, our current action
involves writing WPTs to better
understand the expected behavior
of missing CSS values. This will
enable us to present more informed
and concrete results to the CSSWG
and other platforms, fostering
clearer discussions and more
consistent implementations.
We will update the I2S once that
step that done.
*From:* Domenic Denicola
<[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Friday, June 13, 2025 7:33 AM
*To:* blink-dev
<[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Cc:* Divyansh Mangal
<[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: Intent
to Ship: Support width and height
as presentation attributes on
nested <svg> elements
This intent feels a little risky,
because, as WebKit points out
<https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/509> in
their standards-positions issue,
there isn't really an adequate
specification for how SVG layout
works in cases like this. For
example, how it will behave with
non-px values. (The WPTs you link
only include px values.)
Since SVG2 is a
mostly-unmaintained specification,
and this feature has at least some
web developer demand, I don't want
to require that you specify
everything perfectly here. But I'd
like to see at least some of:
* Discussion with other
implementers in the standards
positions issues. (You've
started these discussions, but
I'd like to give them more
time to settle.)
* More exhaustive web platform
test coverage, including
values like `min-content`,
`calc-size()`, `20em`, `50%`,
`auto`, `stretch`, `50vh`, etc.
* Some discussion in the CSSWG
about how they would like to
see this specified in the future.
* A pull request to update the
relevant parts of the SVG2
spec with some vague language
about the expected results; it
doesn't have to be rigorous,
but it should be at least
enough for other implementers
to understand how to follow
our behavior.
Not all of these are required, and
if I had to pick a single one that
was most important, it would be
expanded web platform test coverage.
On Wednesday, June 11, 2025 at
10:28:17 PM UTC+9
[email protected] wrote:
*Contact emails*
[email protected]
*Explainer*
None
*Specification*
https://svgwg.org/svg2-draft/geometry.html#Sizing
<https://svgwg.org/svg2-draft/geometry.html#Sizing>
*Summary*
This feature supports applying
width and height as
presentation attributes on
nested <svg> elements through
both SVG markup and CSS. This
dual approach provides even
greater flexibility for
developers, allowing them to
manage and style SVG elements
more efficiently within
complex designs.
With this feature the below
two html will now have the
same output:
With CSS Properties for nested
<svg> element:
<svg width="100px" height="100px">
<svg
style="width:50px;height:50px;">
<circle cx="50px"
cy="50px" r="40px" fill="green" />
</svg>
</svg>
Without CSS Properties for
nested <svg> element:
<svg width="100px" height="100px">
<svg width="50px" height="50px">
<circle cx="50px"
cy="50px" r="40px" fill="green" />
</svg>
</svg>
*Blink component*
Blink>SVG
<https://issues.chromium.org/issues?q=customfield1222907:%22Blink%3ESVG%22>
*TAG review*
None
*TAG review status*
Not applicable
*Risks*
*Interoperability and
Compatibility*
None
/Gecko/: No signal
(https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1243
<https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1243>)
In Firefox, the width and
height attributes cannot be
applied on nested <svg>
elements as styles
/WebKit/: Neutral
(https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/509
<https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/509>)
In Safari, the width and
height attributes cannot be
applied on nested <svg>
elements as styles
/Web developers/: Positive 7
people have upvoted this in
the chromium issue.
/Other signals/:
*WebView application risks*
/Does this intent deprecate or
change behavior of existing
APIs, such that it has
potentially high risk for
Android WebView-based
applications?/
None
*Debuggability*
Existing Devtools capabilities
already support this feature.
*Will this feature be
supported on all six Blink
platforms (Windows, Mac,
Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and
Android WebView)?*
Yes
*Is this feature fully tested
by **web-platform-tests
<https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>**?*
Yes
WPTs in chromium:
https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/web_tests/external/wpt/svg/styling/nested-svg-sizing.svg
<https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/web_tests/external/wpt/svg/styling/nested-svg-sizing.svg>
https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/web_tests/external/wpt/svg/styling/nested-svg-sizing-with-use.svg
<https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/web_tests/external/wpt/svg/styling/nested-svg-sizing-with-use.svg>
*Flag name on about://flags*
None
*Finch feature name*
WidthAndHeightAsPresentationAttributesOnNestedSvg
*Rollout plan*
Will ship enabled for all users
*Requires code in //chrome?*
False
*Tracking bug*
https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40409865
<https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40409865>
*Estimated milestones*
Shipping on desktop
139
Shipping on Android
139
Shipping on WebView
139
Shipping on iOS
139
*Anticipated spec changes*
/Open questions about a
feature may be a source of
future web compat or interop
issues. Please list open
issues (e.g. links to known
github issues in the project
for the feature specification)
whose resolution may introduce
web compat/interop risk (e.g.,
changing to naming or
structure of the API in a
non-backward-compatible way)./
None
*Link to entry on the Chrome
Platform Status*
https://chromestatus.com/feature/5178789386256384?gate=5132029741760512
<https://chromestatus.com/feature/5178789386256384?gate=5132029741760512>
This intent message was
generated by Chrome Platform
Status <https://chromestatus.com/>
--
You received this message because you
are subscribed to the Google Groups
"blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and
stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/eceef370-1e35-4aa8-87db-724bcfdb4b0dn%40chromium.org
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/eceef370-1e35-4aa8-87db-724bcfdb4b0dn%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups
"blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop
receiving emails from it, send an email to
[email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOmohS%2B1WsiL%3DDwGEuq73%3DE8M%3DCZGhVEtQENyBA7ZKWDWfKsVw%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOmohS%2B1WsiL%3DDwGEuq73%3DE8M%3DCZGhVEtQENyBA7ZKWDWfKsVw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving
emails from it, send an email to
[email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/e86ed6ec-9ffb-4c9e-b0df-f30099951353n%40chromium.org
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/e86ed6ec-9ffb-4c9e-b0df-f30099951353n%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups "blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
from it, send an email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/caa3d586-5e14-45b3-ac51-da67458e7073n%40chromium.org
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/caa3d586-5e14-45b3-ac51-da67458e7073n%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
it, send an email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/KUXP153MB1324826C6358931A35CBD167AD3EA%40KUXP153MB1324.APCP153.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/KUXP153MB1324826C6358931A35CBD167AD3EA%40KUXP153MB1324.APCP153.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
