W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2009

Re: [css3-background] border-image and the border shorthand

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 15:19:13 -0600
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0902051319k5aca8c98vf84bb00f2afe0a27@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: www-style@w3.org

On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 1:43 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
>
> If an image border and a non-image border are both specified on an element,
> the image border always wins over the non-image border. In a lot of cases
> this makes sense, as you are specifying them together and the non-image
> border is meant as a fallback:
>
>  .super-sale {
>     border: solid red;
>     border-image: url(ragged-edge.svg) 25%;
>  }
>
> But when you have multiple elements and classes and you're using the
> cascade, if a declaration further back in the cascade uses border-image
>
>  .sidebox {
>     border: thin silver;
>     border-image: url(cartouche) 25%;
>  }
>
> and a more specific declaration wants to set a different border
>
>  #message-box {
>    border: none;
>    border-radius: 0.5em;
>    box-shadow: 0.3em 0.3em;
>  }
>
> unless it resets border-image, that new border style will have no effect.
>
> So I'm thinking maybe the 'border' shorthand should reset border-image,
> so that when you use it you know you're starting with a blank canvas.
>
> Thoughts?

Given the current definition of the border shorthand property, I'm
somewhat against this.  I expect shorthands to use the default values
for things that I don't specify, but do not expect them to reset
anything that I *can't* specify in them.  It feels like it might
create hard-to-spot errors.

I do see the reasoning behind it, though, and so wouldn't be opposed
to this if others liked it.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 5 February 2009 21:19:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:16 GMT