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

Re: [css3-background] box-break keywords

From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:52:07 -0800
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-id: <15716BFD-06AC-40D7-9004-266AF7EC17FD@me.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
On Nov 19, 2009, at 1:32 PM, fantasai wrote:

> fantasai wrote:
>> Currently we have as keywords 'continuous' and 'each-box'. They're  
>> not
>> very clear, and one person so far has pointed out that continuous is
>> hard to spell.
>> How about 'slice' and 'separate'?
>>  box-break: slice;    /* Draw backgrounds and borders as if box was  
>> not                           broken, then slice it into pieces */
>>  box-break: separate; /* Draw backgrounds and borders separately  
>> for                           each box: separate, then draw */
>
> Based on the discussion at the telecon this week
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Nov/0265.html
> I have decided to change the property syntax from
>  box-break: continuous | each-box
> to
>  box-break: slice | clone
>
> Everyone agreed that 'slice' was a clear mnemonic. I chose 'clone'
> because each box gets its own copy of the background and border.
> It is not 'repeat' because the background and border are not merely
> repeating the result: each box gets its own complete set of border
> and background bits, which are applied to the box's own size and
> position.
>
> Since this is not a WG resolution, I am open to changing it if we
> have consensus on a better proposal. But I think it's pretty good.

Didn't we decide that the property name should change to something  
like "box-decoration-break"?

Simon
Received on Thursday, 19 November 2009 23:53:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:22 GMT