From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 23:59:04 -0700
Message-ID: <4A90E8B8.8010900@terrainformatica.com>
CC: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
```Brad Kemper wrote:
>
> On Aug 22, 2009, at 9:41 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>
>>> On Aug 22, 2009, at 8:30 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>>>>
>>>> got couple of questions.
>>>>
>>>> Phrase after [Example XXI]:
>>>>
>>>> "(In such cases its center might not coincide with that of the outer
>>>> border curve.)"
>>>>
>>>> Not clear what it means. Center of circle having radius zero? It's a
>>>> point then. Has no center... Or is this about something else?
>>> That is how I read it. A point does have a center (it's the same point).
>>
>> Mathematically speaking - yes, someone can say that point is a circle of
>> radius zero but that is pretty unusual way of saying "point".
>>
>>> That point would no longer align with the center of the center of the
>>> circle describing the outside of the border, when the border
>>> thickness is thicker than the corner-radius. There may be a better
>>> way to say this...
>>
>> In case of borders of different thickness centers of outer and inner
>> circles are different. Is this what you are trying to say?
>
> No. But given that fact, if you have, say a 20px border and a 10px
> border-radius, the inner "circle" (actually a corner), will not be at
> the center of the 10px circle. I believe that's what it is saying,
> although it seems kind of self evident to me. I can't really imagine it
> some other way.

Sorry, this is somehow hard to understand.

"will not be at the center of the 10px circle" but where?

>
>>
>>>> [...]
>>>> And the main question:
>>>>
>>>> "Other effects that clip to the border or padding edge (such as
>>>> ‘overflow’) also must clip to the curve."
>>>>
>>>> Clipping of content on such border may lead to information lost.
>>>> Text behind rounded corner will not be seen at all [top-left corner,
>>>> case #8 above].
>>> Text that goes outside its boundaries is also "information lost" when
>>> overflow is 'hidden'. Thus it is within the author's ability to
>>> obscure text with overflow, as always. If I don't want the text to be
>>
>> It is about overflow:auto rather than hidden.
>> You cannot see that portion even with overflow:auto. That is the point.
>
> If I consider that a problem when I'm authoring, then I will add padding
> to prevent it. CSS does not prevent authors from hiding content that
> users can't get to. It happens all the time with negative absolute
> positioning, for instance, or can happen with overflow:hidden. It can
> also happen with black text on top of a black border with border-radius.
> So instead of trying to prevent authors from creating unreadable text,
> let us just be responsible for our own design decisions. I think it is
> completely reasonable and expected that any border that would clip
> content should also do so at the curved corners.

Take a look on this case:

>
>> I think we just need to remove "Other effects that clip to the border
>> or padding edge (such as ‘overflow’) also must clip to the curve."
>> statement. It does not create solutions - just problems.
>
> I disagree.

Could you provide some usable case then where you will need overflow
clipping of content on rounded border?

>
>> Technically it is even not possible to do such clipping if
>> antialiasing is used. Border should be drawn on top of content but not
>> underneath as the spec mandates.
>
> I don't see how that prevents you from clipping the content (including
> antialiasing) to the same path as what is under the content.
>

Ok, technically *and* practically. I don't know modern platform that
has clipping with antialiasing exposed in public API.
There is simply no need for such function.

--
Andrew Fedoniouk.

http://terrainformatica.com
```
Received on Sunday, 23 August 2009 06:59:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:28 UTC