W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > November 2007

Re: [CSS] Expandable background images, proposal

From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2007 00:33:19 -0800
Message-ID: <4749334F.2030000@terrainformatica.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
CC: www-style <www-style@w3.org>

fantasai wrote:
> 
> Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>>
>> fantasai wrote:
>>> Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>>>>
>>>> background-repeat:expand; is defined here:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.terrainformatica.com/wiki/doku.php?id=h-smile:expandable-backgrounds 
>>>
>>>
>>> How is this different from the current 'border-image' proposal?
>>>   
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-css3-background-20050216/#the-border-image
>>>
>>
>> Differences are:
>>
>> First of all: my proposal does not require new attributes like 
>> border-image you have mentioned.
> 
> But it significantly complicates existing properties, so I think that's a
> non-issue.

Beg my pardon but what exactly complicates existing properties?
In any case I believe that complexity is far less than the-border-image.

> 
>> Second: I am using single image for background and borders. As far as 
>> understand the border-image in the way it is defined is mutually 
>> exclusive with background-image. Or probably I do not understand its 
>> idea enough? E.g. what comes first: rendering of such border-image or 
>> rendering of the background-image? As far as I understand either one 
>> of them shall be drawn on top of another. So what is the point to use 
>> them both?
> 
> The border-image image is drawn over the background, not instead of it.
> This allows the possibility of having an image *border* (with a transparent
> center) rather than an expandable image while also having an image
> background that is positioned or tiled as appropriate behind it.

Hmm...
http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-css3-background-20050216/#the-border-image
tells us that border is drawn over the place defined by 'border-width' 
attribute. As far as I understand middle section of the source image is 
always stretched to fill padding box. Am I right? If yes then to be 
practically useful this border image will have transparent middle 
section. In most cases.

> 
>> Usually such expandable borders and background is really a single 
>> entity from graphical design perspective so it is better to define 
>> them as a single image.
> 
> Right, and that's how border-image works as well.

Not exactly. In my case middle section can be tiled or stretched.

> 
>> Expandable image is really a background image by its concept.
> 
> It depends on the usage. In the fancy orange button case, yes. But in many
> other cases such as in your first example it is only a border.

These are two basic usages of such background images.
Last two cases at: 
http://www.terrainformatica.com/htmlayout/images/image2.png

I prefer sole and simple mechanism that allows to cover both cases 
rather than halved solutions.

> 
>> E.g. it is rendered as normal background - in padding box of the 
>> element so can coexist with existing borders. The border-image is 
>> again mutually exclusive with borders: "Specifies an image to use 
>> instead of the border styles given by the 'border-style' properties". 
>> This is too limiting.
> 
> How is it limiting? What use cases do you have that does it not address?

background-repeat:expand does not disable any existing style feature 
available in CSS - it only extends opportunities.

I've seen cases when borders (like: 1px solid red) were used 
additionally to the background image. E.g. different colour schemas that 
use same background with border shadows.

> 
>> The same thing with the 'round' modifier. To be used practically such 
>> roundness shall be implemented as a constraint of dimensions of border 
>> box of the element. In the way it is defined in the border-image it is 
>> not useful at all.
> 
> Why is it not useful at all?

Because it assumes scaling of bitmap image with scale factors close to 
1. The worst case designer can imagine.

-- 
Andrew Fedoniouk.

http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Sunday, 25 November 2007 08:33:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:56 GMT