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

Re: [Backgrounds/Borders] What to do when a border-image fails to load

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 21:24:49 -0700
Cc: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, "www-style@w3.org list" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <B1418FC4-E3DB-4855-A5A2-D342794B1A79@gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>

On Mar 29, 2009, at 8:51 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>> I written up a proposal that I think solves this problem, plus a  
>> couple
>> others that I think are even bigger for authors. I'd appreciate it if
>> everyone could take a look and let me know what you think. In the  
>> following
>> link, I describe three problems (including this one), and a nice  
>> solution
>> that I would love to see implemented:
>> http://www.bradclicks.com/cssplay/border-image/Thinking_Outside_The_Box.html
>
> I think I am in love, Brad.
>
> Question: When would the first and second line of widths ever be
> different?  In the original draft the second set of numbers specified
> the border width, but what does it specify here?  A scaling factor?
> In your examples they are always the same, so I can't tell.

As before, they determine the CSS lengths that the images occupy,  
whereas the first set of numbers is the number of image pixels. This  
means that you could get higher resolution images into the borders by  
having more image pixels occupy an area of fewer CSS pixels, or you  
could use percentages, or ems, or cm, etc. in the second set of  
numbers. I don't think I changed anything there (other than to say the  
the CSS pixels in excess of the border-width would not affect layout),  
so others please correct me if I misstated that.

I suspect in the vast majority of cases that authors would use them as  
I have, so it is somewhat unsatisfying to me to have to type them out  
in order to get to the third set of numbers. Perhaps the third set of  
numbers should be preceded by something other than a slash (a double  
slash maybe?), so that the second set can just default to 1 image  
pixel = 1px.



> Also, a small but confusing typo: in the code for the last example, in
> the third set of numbers, you have a "146px" rather than "14px".  You
> also misspelled "Alladins_Lamp.png".
>
> ~TJ

I misspelled it in my actual image too, so I just kept it that way  
(Google has 1.2 million results for "Alladin"). But I'll go ahead and  
change that and the typo. Thanks.
Received on Monday, 30 March 2009 04:25:29 GMT

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