Bugzilla

Note, the spec text here is slightly ambiguous.  In the phrase "as if it were a replaced element whose specified width and height are the same as the element’s used content box size", I'm assuming the second "the element" refers to the float (the thing that `shape-outside` is specified on).

But there's another possible interpretation of this sentence - you could imagine that "the element" is referring to the aforementioned replaced element from earlier in the sentence.  i.e. you could read it as saying: "...as if it were a replaced element whose specified width and height are the same as [the replaced element]'s used content box size".

This second interpretation would sort-of support the Chromium/WebKit behavior.  However, I don't think that second interpretation makes much sense, because (under that reading) the sentence is circular; it talks about a replaced element that's sized under certain constraints, where one of those constraints would require you to already know the used size replaced element.

So: I'm pretty confident that our reading is the correct one (in that it matches the intent of the spec).

+CC Alan Stearns in case he wants to weigh in; it looks like he added this language (an earlier version of it) in the second chunk of this commit:
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/commit/f80fb07befa7dbdeda9b97be935ad038523d3e2c

Note, the spec text here is slightly ambiguous.  In the phrase "as if it were a replaced element whose specified width and height are the same as the element’s used content box size", I'm assuming the second "the element" refers to the float (the thing that `shape-outside` is specified on).

But there's another possible interpretation of this sentence - you could imagine "the element" is referring to the aforementioned replaced element from earlier in the sentence.  i.e. you could read it as saying: "...as if it were a replaced element whose specified width and height are the same as [the replaced element]'s used content box size".

This second interpretation would sort-of support the Chromium/WebKit behavior.  However, I don't think that second interpretation makes much sense, because (under that reading) the sentence is circular; it talks about a replaced element that's sized under certain constraints, where one of those constraints would require you to already know the used size replaced element.

So: I'm pretty confident that our reading is the correct one (in that it matches the intent of the spec).

+CC Alan Stearns in case he wants to weigh in; it looks like he added this language (an earlier version of it) in the second chunk of this commit:
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/commit/f80fb07befa7dbdeda9b97be935ad038523d3e2c

Note, the spec text here is slightly ambiguous.  In the phrase "as if it were a replaced element whose specified width and height are the same as the element’s used content box size", I'm assuming the second "the element" refers to the float (the thing that `shape-outside` is specified on).

But there's another possible interpretation of this sentence - you could interpret "the element" as referring to the sentence's aforementioned replaced element.  i.e. you could read it as saying: "...as if it were a replaced element whose specified width and height are the same as [the replaced element]'s used content box size".

This second interpretation would sort-of support the Chromium/WebKit behavior.  However, I don't think that second interpretation makes much sense, because (under that reading) the sentence is circular; it talks about a replaced element that's sized under certain constraints, where one of those constraints would require you to already know the used size replaced element.

So: I'm pretty confident that our reading is the correct one (in that it matches the intent of the spec).

+CC Alan Stearns in case he wants to weigh in; it looks like he added this language (an earlier version of it) in the second chunk of this commit:
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/commit/f80fb07befa7dbdeda9b97be935ad038523d3e2c

Note, the spec text here is slightly ambiguous.  In the phrase "as if it were a replaced element whose specified width and height are the same as the element’s used content box size", I'm assuming the second "the element" refers to the float (the thing that `shape-outside` is specified on).

But there's another possible interpretation of this sentence - you could interpret "the element" as referring to the sentence's aforementioned replaced element.  i.e. you could read it as saying: "...as if it were a replaced element whose specified width and height are the same as [the replaced element]'s used content box size".

This second interpretation would sort-of support the Chromium/WebKit behavior.  However, I don't think that second interpretation makes much sense, because (under that reading) the sentence is circular; it talks about a replaced element that's sized under certain constraints, where one of those constraints would require you to already know the used size of the replaced element.

So: I'm pretty confident that our reading is the correct one (in that it matches the intent of the spec).

+CC Alan Stearns in case he wants to weigh in; it looks like he added this language (an earlier version of it) in the second chunk of this commit:
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/commit/f80fb07befa7dbdeda9b97be935ad038523d3e2c

Note, the [spec text](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-shapes-1/#shapes-from-image) here is slightly ambiguous.  In the phrase "as if it were a replaced element whose specified width and height are the same as the element’s used content box size", I'm assuming the second "the element" refers to the float (the thing that `shape-outside` is specified on).

But there's another possible interpretation of this sentence - you could interpret "the element" as referring to the sentence's aforementioned replaced element.  i.e. you could read it as saying: "...as if it were a replaced element whose specified width and height are the same as [the replaced element]'s used content box size".

This second interpretation would sort-of support the Chromium/WebKit behavior.  However, I don't think that second interpretation makes much sense, because (under that reading) the sentence is circular; it talks about a replaced element that's sized under certain constraints, where one of those constraints would require you to already know the used size of the replaced element.

So: I'm pretty confident that our reading is the correct one (in that it matches the intent of the spec).

+CC Alan Stearns in case he wants to weigh in; it looks like he added this language (an earlier version of it) in the second chunk of this commit:
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/commit/f80fb07befa7dbdeda9b97be935ad038523d3e2c

Note, the [spec text](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-shapes-1/#shapes-from-image) here is slightly ambiguous.  In the phrase "*as if it were a replaced element whose specified width and height are the same as the element’s used content box size*", I'm assuming the second "the element" refers to the float (the thing that `shape-outside` is specified on).

But there's another possible interpretation of this sentence - you could interpret "the element" as referring to the sentence's aforementioned replaced element.  i.e. you could read it as saying: "...as if it were a replaced element whose specified width and height are the same as [the replaced element]'s used content box size".

This second interpretation would sort-of support the Chromium/WebKit behavior.  However, I don't think that second interpretation makes much sense, because (under that reading) the sentence is circular; it talks about a replaced element that's sized under certain constraints, where one of those constraints would require you to already know the used size of the replaced element.

So: I'm pretty confident that our reading is the correct one (in that it matches the intent of the spec).

+CC Alan Stearns in case he wants to weigh in; it looks like he added this language (an earlier version of it) in the second chunk of this commit:
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/commit/f80fb07befa7dbdeda9b97be935ad038523d3e2c

Note, the [spec text](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-shapes-1/#shapes-from-image) here is slightly ambiguous.  In the phrase "*as if it were a replaced element whose specified width and height are the same as the element’s used content box size*", I'm assuming the second "the element" refers to the float (the thing that `shape-outside` is specified on).

But there's another possible interpretation of this sentence - you could interpret "the element" as referring to the sentence's aforementioned replaced element.  i.e. you could read it as saying: "...as if it were a *replaced element* whose specified width and height are the same as *[the replaced element]'s* used content box size".

This second interpretation would sort-of support the Chromium/WebKit behavior.  However, I don't think that second interpretation makes much sense, because (under that reading) the sentence is circular; it talks about a replaced element that's sized under certain constraints, where one of those constraints would require you to already know the used size of the replaced element.

So: I'm pretty confident that our reading is the correct one (in that it matches the intent of the spec).

+CC Alan Stearns in case he wants to weigh in; it looks like he added this language (an earlier version of it) in the second chunk of this commit:
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/commit/f80fb07befa7dbdeda9b97be935ad038523d3e2c