Definitely, but that’s not helped at all by the default height being 10px. And it’s not even always a problem, e.g. if you are in a situation where gap spacing doesn’t apply because it’s the only sibling. My point: 10px doesn’t help at all, and it sometimes hurts.

I just don’t see any reason to have the default set to 10px. It encourages/teaches thinking about Groups in the wrong way, I think. Philosophically, we should think of a group as a container that fits content and the content determines the height of the container (100% agree ā€œfit height to contentā€ needs to be checked by default).

Q: What’s the height of a group?
A: The height of the content!

^^ That should be the baseline assumption. If there’s ever any answer different, then it shows that something is going on for a specific reason. If I’m a developer and I see a min height value, I’m immediately thinking

Why this value? What does this do? If I change it will I break something? Does this need to be this exact min height?

In tradcode we had this term ā€œmagic numbersā€ for when you have a number value hardcoded in but no explanation as to where that number came from. So if a padding needs to be 2x the gap plus 4px, and the gap is 8px, it’s better to write padding-top: (gap * 2) + 4px than to write padding-top: 20px because a developer seeing the ā€œmagic numberā€ of 20 has no idea why it’s 20. I think a similar principle applies here. There shouldn’t be completely arbitrary values (especially by default!) in elements which aren’t there for a purpose. This is why when you create a DIV in HTML it is height 0px. It would make no sense to give a container a min height.