- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 23:28:58 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
Bert and I went through all the open CSS3 Backgrounds and Borders issues
on Monday. Here are our conclusions. If there are no objections, we plan
to close the first three categories with the resolutions suggested below
after next week's telecon. (The last category needs further discussion.)
Issues to Close No Change
-------------------------
Rename 'each-box' value of 'background-break' to 'discontinuous'.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/23 ISSUE-23
No change. Bert and I felt 'each-box' is both clearer and easier to
type.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-152
Make border-image border widths not affect width calculations.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/27
No change. The current behavior and the proposed behavior address
different use cases, and you can approximate the proposed behavior
with multiple backgrounds. (The advantage of the current behavior
is that you don't lose padding depending on whether border-image
is used or not. If the outer width needs to be constant, border-box
sizing can be used.)
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-288
Allow 'background-repeat: round' to stretch instead of shrink.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/20 ISSUE-20
No change. In most cases it is better to shrink than to stretch. We
didn't see much value in allowing images to stretch here.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-362
Merge 'background-origin' property with something else.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/13 ISSUE-13
No change. Several different properties depend on the value of this
property, and it doesn't fit very naturally anywhere else. We plan
to merge it with 'background-clip' in the shorthand, however:
see Issue 24.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-366
Change name of 'background-size' to something else.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/18 ISSUE-18
No change. The name is not ideal, but there were no significantly
better suggestions.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-640
Feature Requests to Reject
--------------------------
Proposal for a 'text' value for 'background-clip'
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/17 ISSUE-17
Rejected. Or perhaps "retracted" is more accurate here. We're
not against adding the functionality to CSS, it just doesn't fit
well as a background.
See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Apr/0067.html
and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Apr/0066.html
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-136
Allow four coordinates on 'background-position'.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/21 ISSUE-21
Reject. This is very similar to ISSUE-12 (which was also rejected)
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/12
and 'background-size' is a more straightforward syntax for affecting
the image size.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-139
Add 'transparent' keyword for centerless border images.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/28 ISSUE-28
Reject. The use case is saving the implementation some effort.
However, Bert and I don't think anyone is going to bother using
this keyword, and it complicates the syntax.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-333
Make default 'box-shadow' offsets non-zero.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/40 ISSUE-40
Reject. There are good use cases for zero offsets, it's an obvious
default, and it matches 'text-shadow'.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-573
Make 'box-shadow' offsets optional.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/40 ISSUE-40
Reject. It makes the syntax very confusing once a 'spread' value
is added, since one length would mean a blur radius only whereas
two lengths are always interpreted as offsets.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-584
Scale background image relative to its own size
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/19 ISSUE-19
Reject. We didn't come up with any convincing use cases for this
feature.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-647
Issues to Close With Changes
----------------------------
Define where background colors are clipped and how this is controlled.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/15 ISSUE-15
Resolve: Background colors are clipped to the same rectangle as the
bottommost image.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-80
Positioning of a single tile when 'background-repeat: space'.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/8 ISSUE-8
Resolve: If only only one tile fits, it is positioned according to
'background-position'.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-91
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-132
Make non-fallback background color optional.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/5
Resolve: Accept: 'background-color: / white' should be equivalent to
'background-color: transparent / white'. Transparent is the most
common case here, and making the keyword optional saves some typing,
and avoids typos. (It looks more reasonable in the shorthand:
'background: url(semitransparent.png) / white'.)
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-103
'bounding-box' and 'continuous' should affect blocks differently in multi-col
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/43 ISSUE-43
Resolve: Fix 'bounding-box' definition for block to match the
definition for inlines.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-162
vertical major writing direction should attach broken backgrounds side-to-side
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/47 ISSUE-47
Resolve: When 'background-break' is 'bounding-box' or 'continuous'
broken boxes are attached in the direction of the block progression
of the root element (for page breaking) or nearest ancestor
multi-column element (for column breaking).
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-172
Define behavior of backgrounds when broken across varying page widths.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/22 ISSUE-22
Resolve: When 'background-break' is 'continuous', each piece draws
its background honoring its y-position within the chain, but assuming
that the whole element has the same width as this piece. This ensures
right-aligned images stay right-aligned, left-aligned images stay
left-aligned, and centered images stay centered. When
'background-break' is 'bounding-box', align all boxes by their start
border edge before drawing the bounding box.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-246
Define what happens when border radii intersect.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/29 ISSUE-29
Resolve: Reduce all radii in proportion until no radii intersect.
This avoids sharp points in the borders while preserving the shape
of the box.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-319
Proposal for 'no-clip' value for 'background-clip'.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/16 ISSUE-16
Resolve: Add 'no-clip' value to 'background-clip', mark "at risk".
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-447
Simplify 'background' shorthand by combining clip and origin.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/24 ISSUE-24
Resolve: Allow the 'background' shorthand to take the values for
'background-origin'. Also allow it to take a 'no-clip' keyword,
which sets 'background-clip' to 'no-clip'. If 'no-clip' is not
present but one of the 'background-origin' keywords are, set
'background-clip' to the same value.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-366
'bg-clip' and 'bg-origin' values should match 'box-sizing' keywords.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/42 ISSUE-42
Resolve: Accept: change 'border' to 'border-box', 'padding' to
'padding-box', and 'content' to 'content-box'.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-471
Add "spread" value to 'box-shadow'.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/41 ISSUE-41
Resolve: Add "spread" as optional fourth length value after "blur".
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-503
Box shadow grammar errors and suggestions.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/40 ISSUE-40
Resolve: Fix grammar errors to match 'text-shadow'.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-584
Define whether box-shadows are drawn inside the element.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/32 ISSUE-32
Resolve: Box-shadows are only drawn outside the element's border-box.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-619
Add 'contain' and 'cover' as keywords for 'background-size'.
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/45 ISSUE-45
Resolve: Accept.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-643
Rename 'background-origin' to 'background-box'
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/46 ISSUE-46
Resolve: Bert and I tentatively accept this suggestion, but are open
to better names.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-715
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080513#l-3
Issues For WG Discussion
------------------------
Positioning from corners other than top left:
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/10 ISSUE-10
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/11 ISSUE-11
Positioning fixed distances from the bottom/right edges is a common
request. Note that it can be done with calc() by subtracting from
100%, so the question becomes whether an alternative syntax is wanted
for usability.
Positioning from the start/end edges can't be done with calc().
Multiple borders:
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/25 ISSUE-25
Bert and I are happy to leave this to XBL, but wanted to check that
implementors agree.
Percentage border widths:
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/26 ISSUE-26
Margins and padding already allow percentages. On the other hand,
there would be problems with losing a border due to auto-width
calculations that result in the percentage defaulting to zero.
Percentage border radii:
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/30 ISSUE-30
A possible snag is whether percentages are relative to a radius's
corresponding dimension or if they are relative to the shortest
dimension or something else.
Inner Box Shadow:
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/44 ISSUE-44
There have been quite a few comments about adding such a feature,
or at least an "inner glow" feature (which this would address).
Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2008 06:29:38 UTC