W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2005

Re: [css3-background], comments on 'border-radius'

From: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 20:25:56 +0100
To: Allan Sandfeld Jensen <kde@carewolf.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-Id: <200502242025.56624.bert@w3.org>

On Tuesday 22 February 2005 10:50, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 February 2005 00:58, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
> > ---------------------
> > Does anybody counts *number* of attibutes existing and proposed?
> > As for now there are far more than one hundred in CSS table.
> > Almost quarter of them can interfere with each other creating
> > non-manageable number
> > of test cases and exceptions in documentation "but if ... and ...
> > or ... then ... only if container is ... end next element is"
> >
> > My point is simple: If we need to, we should add one feature which
> > covers three such "half-features" for the sake of KISS at least.
> >
> > BTW: why just do not define a minimal subset of SVG (no CSS and no
> > script - pure graphics) and to use it as a
> > background-image?
>
> I agree completly. As someone who has tried to implement new CSS3
> features, they often seem completly ridiculous and has too many
> corner-cases that has to be considered. A more generic solution like
> depending on a minimal SVG standard  would make the standard clearer,
> make the job of the implementor easier, and make it more likely that
> every implementation has the same set of features (rather than every
> browser implementing a few of the hundreds of new properties and
> values).

It's a good argument, but not the only one. We indeed don't want 
browsers to have to implement too many things twice (once for CSS and 
once for SVG) and we don't want authors to have to learn too many 
different properties when a generic solution could work as well.

But there is a balance: a property may still be easier to use than an 
image editor, rendering will probably be faster without images, 
downloading certainly will be, the quality may well be better on other 
equipment then where the author made his images.

I'm all for putting SVG on so many browsers that you can take it for 
granted, the same way you can take JPEG and PNG for granted. All the 
latest smart phones have SVG Tiny and some desktop browsers are working 
on SVG support. (Unfortunately, SVG Tiny lacks support for styling with 
CSS, so you will have to create different SVG images, even if only the 
color is different :-( )

But whether ubiquitous SVG is enough to tip the balance against 
'border-radius' remains to be seen.

(And I'm using both Konqueror and Safari daily, so I want KHTML to be 
one of the engines that can implement CSS3.)

>
> Even then the border module is not nearly as bad as the list module,
> which appears to want enumerations for every language and alphabet in
> the world.

Human languages aren't very regular. How would you do it?



Bert
-- 
  Bert Bos                                ( W 3 C ) http://www.w3.org/
  http://www.w3.org/people/bos                               W3C/ERCIM
  bert@w3.org                             2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93
  +33 (0)4 92 38 76 92            06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Thursday, 24 February 2005 19:26:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:36 GMT