GITHUB . COM {}

Matching Content Categories {📚}

• Graphic Design
• Social Networks
• Mobile Technology & AI

Content Management System {📝}

What CMS is github.com built with?

Github.com utilizes WORDPRESS.

Traffic Estimate {📈}

What is the average monthly size of github.com audience?

🚀🌠 Tremendous Traffic: 10M - 20M visitors per month


Based on our best estimate, this website will receive around 10,000,019 visitors per month in the current month.
However, some sources were not loaded, we suggest to reload the page to get complete results.

check SE Ranking
check Ahrefs
check Similarweb
check Ubersuggest
check Semrush

How Does Github.com Make Money? {💸}

Subscription Packages {💳}

How Much Does Github.com Make? {💰}

Subscription Packages {💳}

Prices on github.com are in US Dollars ($). They range from $4.00/month to $21.00/month.
We estimate that the site has approximately 5,013,426 paying customers.
The estimated monthly recurring revenue (MRR) is $21,056,387.
The estimated annual recurring revenues (ARR) are $252,676,649.

Wordpress Themes and Plugins {🎨}

What WordPress theme does this site use?

It is strange but we were not able to detect any theme on the page.

What WordPress plugins does this website use?

It is strange but we were not able to detect any plugins on the page.

Keywords {🔍}

size, sizes, width, intrinsic, work, csssizing, mincontent, height, layout, fantasai, clear, fitcontent, dbaron, function, input, current, mentioned, space, content, sign, maxcontent, issue, csswritingmodes, concepts, provide, added, fixed, tabatkins, projects, inputs, computation, orthogonal, flows, provided, depends, percentage, resolved, cssgrid, commented, infinite, milestone, navigation, open, code, issues, pull, requests, actions, security, element,

Topics {✒️}

css-writing-modes max-content' web-platform-tests/wpt [css-align] baseline content-alignment personal information [css-sizing] css-sizing-1 [css-sizing] vertical writing mode dbaron mentioned [css-align] type projects work min-content main size flexbox orthogonal flows introduced accomodate orthogonal flows assigned labels tracked max-content sizes fit-content size comment metadata assignees min-content contributions intrinsic sizes require treating percentage sizes fallback behavior defined bzbarsky mentioned projects milestone min-content width layout algorithm depends sizing resulting layout width 'fit-content' 'fit-content max-content intrinsic size min-content milestone relationships min-/max-/ horizontal text percentage sizes intrinsic width issue performing layout layout depends layout algos cross-size block size size turns flex items calling code percentage heights bullet point

Payment Methods {📊}

• Braintree

Questions {❓}

• Already have an account?
• [css-sizing] how should inline-axis intrinsic sizing work for 'fit-content' and 'fit-content()'?

Schema {🗺️}

DiscussionForumPosting:
      context:https://schema.org
      headline:[css-sizing] need to be clear about inputs to computation of min-content, max-content, and fit-content sizes
      articleBody:Prior to the presence of orthogonal flows introduced by css-writing-modes, `min-content` and `max-content` sizes were a function only of an element and its descendants (their content and their styles, though excluding the (`min-`/`max-`/)(`width`/`height`) properties on the element itself). The `fit-content` size is derived from these sizes, but is also a function of an additional input that is provided (an "available width"). To accomodate orthogonal flows, this has changed so that these sizes are a function of a width in the opposite dimension. For example, the min-content width is now a function of an available height, since if the content is in a vertical writing mode it needs to lay out at that available height to determine the resulting layout width. css-sizing-1 should be clearer about these concepts requiring this external input and not being purely a function of the content. This is important because every spec that *uses* these concepts needs to provide this input. Then, all of the other specs that refer to these concepts need to say what inputs they are providing. (To provide a random example, the [definition of min-content main size](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox-1/#ref-for-min-content%E2%91%A1) in flexbox says it depends on the min-content contributions of the flex items, but it doesn't say what cross-size is used as the available width input to that computation.) Furthermore, it's not clear to me that this is the only input. These concepts may also require a containing block size in one or both dimensions to be provided in order to allow percentage sizes to be resolved. (The containing block size may be different from the available size in the dimension in which the available size is provided.) For example,, when performing layout of horizontal text within an available width, the height resulting from that layout depends on how percentage heights and widths are resolved. It's not clear to me if some of the users of these intrinsic sizes require these percentages to be resolved against something nonzero or whether layout-based intrinsic size calculations should work like traditional intrinsic size calculations by treating percentage sizes as zero.
      author:
         url:https://github.com/dbaron
         type:Person
         name:dbaron
      datePublished:2018-07-06T08:40:10.000Z
      interactionStatistic:
         type:InteractionCounter
         interactionType:https://schema.org/CommentAction
         userInteractionCount:4
      url:https://github.com/2890/csswg-drafts/issues/2890
      context:https://schema.org
      headline:[css-sizing] need to be clear about inputs to computation of min-content, max-content, and fit-content sizes
      articleBody:Prior to the presence of orthogonal flows introduced by css-writing-modes, `min-content` and `max-content` sizes were a function only of an element and its descendants (their content and their styles, though excluding the (`min-`/`max-`/)(`width`/`height`) properties on the element itself). The `fit-content` size is derived from these sizes, but is also a function of an additional input that is provided (an "available width"). To accomodate orthogonal flows, this has changed so that these sizes are a function of a width in the opposite dimension. For example, the min-content width is now a function of an available height, since if the content is in a vertical writing mode it needs to lay out at that available height to determine the resulting layout width. css-sizing-1 should be clearer about these concepts requiring this external input and not being purely a function of the content. This is important because every spec that *uses* these concepts needs to provide this input. Then, all of the other specs that refer to these concepts need to say what inputs they are providing. (To provide a random example, the [definition of min-content main size](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox-1/#ref-for-min-content%E2%91%A1) in flexbox says it depends on the min-content contributions of the flex items, but it doesn't say what cross-size is used as the available width input to that computation.) Furthermore, it's not clear to me that this is the only input. These concepts may also require a containing block size in one or both dimensions to be provided in order to allow percentage sizes to be resolved. (The containing block size may be different from the available size in the dimension in which the available size is provided.) For example,, when performing layout of horizontal text within an available width, the height resulting from that layout depends on how percentage heights and widths are resolved. It's not clear to me if some of the users of these intrinsic sizes require these percentages to be resolved against something nonzero or whether layout-based intrinsic size calculations should work like traditional intrinsic size calculations by treating percentage sizes as zero.
      author:
         url:https://github.com/dbaron
         type:Person
         name:dbaron
      datePublished:2018-07-06T08:40:10.000Z
      interactionStatistic:
         type:InteractionCounter
         interactionType:https://schema.org/CommentAction
         userInteractionCount:4
      url:https://github.com/2890/csswg-drafts/issues/2890
Person:
      url:https://github.com/dbaron
      name:dbaron
      url:https://github.com/dbaron
      name:dbaron
InteractionCounter:
      interactionType:https://schema.org/CommentAction
      userInteractionCount:4
      interactionType:https://schema.org/CommentAction
      userInteractionCount:4

External Links {🔗}(3)

• Monthly income for https://github.blog
• What is the monthly revenue of https://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox-1/#ref-for-min-content%E2%91%A1?
• Check the income stats for https://www.githubstatus.com/

Analytics and Tracking {📊}

• Site Verification - Google

Libraries {📚}

• Clipboard.js
• D3.js
• GSAP
• Lodash

Emails and Hosting {✉️}

Mail Servers:

• aspmx.l.google.com
• alt1.aspmx.l.google.com
• alt2.aspmx.l.google.com
• alt3.aspmx.l.google.com
• alt4.aspmx.l.google.com

Name Servers:

• dns1.p08.nsone.net
• dns2.p08.nsone.net
• dns3.p08.nsone.net
• dns4.p08.nsone.net
• ns-1283.awsdns-32.org
• ns-1707.awsdns-21.co.uk
• ns-421.awsdns-52.com
• ns-520.awsdns-01.net