Remove -webkit-aspect-ratio support since it is superseded by aspect-ratio (https://www.w3.org/TR/css-sizing-4/).
Created attachment 412747 [details] Patch
Created attachment 412784 [details] Patch
Comment on attachment 412784 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=412784&action=review > Source/WebCore/rendering/RenderReplaced.cpp:-121 > - float aspectRatio = m_intrinsicSize.aspectRatio(); > - LayoutSize frameSize = size(); > - float frameAspectRatio = frameSize.aspectRatio(); > - if (frameAspectRatio < aspectRatio) > - setHeight(computeReplacedLogicalHeightRespectingMinMaxHeight(frameSize.height() * frameAspectRatio / aspectRatio)); > - else if (frameAspectRatio > aspectRatio) > - setWidth(computeReplacedLogicalWidthRespectingMinMaxWidth(frameSize.width() * aspectRatio / frameAspectRatio, ComputePreferred)); > - } This was added in https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/164265/webkit so removing it is a behavior change, and we suspect that this might be used by (i)Books. I think we'll have to hold off on this change until we can determine that.
(In reply to Simon Fraser (smfr) from comment #3) > Comment on attachment 412784 [details] > Patch > > This was added in https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/164265/webkit so > removing it is a behavior change, and we suspect that this might be used by > (i)Books. I think we'll have to hold off on this change until we can > determine that. Thanks for the heads up! Would it make sense to restrict -webkit-aspect-ratio support to only parse from-intrinsic/from-dimensions and remove auto/specified as a first step?
Yes I think that would be OK.
Created attachment 412837 [details] Patch
Created attachment 412847 [details] Patch
Created attachment 412850 [details] Patch
Created attachment 412895 [details] Patch
<rdar://problem/71118930>
Created attachment 414128 [details] Patch
Created attachment 414130 [details] Patch
Committed r269820: <https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/269820> All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug and clearing flags on attachment 414130 [details].