W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > site-comments@w3.org > June 2012

Fwd: [css3-background] 'auto' value for background-size

From: Joe Thomas <joethomas@motorola.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 23:05:23 +0000
Message-Id: <CAETFwdC8XtCPXVpUmYruRE3PsLhYxTVSD8a11OCh46bPb7JOCA@mail.gmail.com>
To: site-comments@w3.org
Hi,

My name is Joe Thomas. I am from Motorola Mobility, Sunnyvale - California. Can someone help me to push the message to the public forum? What is the procedure to add my email id to the authorized addresses so that the e-mails gets pushed automatically without moderator intervention?

Regards,
Joe Thomas

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Joe Thomas <joethomas@motorola.com>
Date: Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:44 AM
Subject: Re:[css3-background] 'auto' value for background-size
To: www-style@w3.org


Subject line modified.

Regards
Joe


On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Thomas <joethomas@motorola.com> wrote:
Hi,

I would like to get a clarification on having "auto" value for one dimension in background-size property.

As per the specification http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-background/#background-size, an ‘auto’ value for one dimension is resolved by using the image's intrinsic ratio and the size of the other dimension, or failing that, using the image's intrinsic size, or failing that, treating it as 100%.

Assume that  background-size is specified as "auto 8px" and the background-image used is of intrinsic size (2,32). Assume that the UA takes 'integer' for width, then the width of the background image using intrinsic-ratio computes to 0 {(2/32) * 8 = 0.5, which is rounded to 0 as UA takes only integer for width}

Does computing the width to 0 using intrinsic ratio can be considered as a failure? What are the various types of failures that can happen while resolving the dimension using intrinsic ratio?

Thanks,
Joe Thomas
Motorola Mobility Inc
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2012 23:12:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 24 October 2012 16:21:34 GMT