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

image-fit and image-position renamed?

From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:14:43 +0200
Message-ID: <19128.59875.972396.497111@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style@w3.org
fantasai scribed:

 > image-fit and image-position
 > ----------------------------
 > 
 >    RESOLVED (TENTATIVE): Merge image-fit and image-position into single
 >                         'fit' property
 >    RATIONALE: 'image-fit' and 'image-position' are not appropriate names for
 >               what SVG wants to use them for, and nobody had a better proposal.

I don't think this is a good solution, the resulting property will be
very complex considering all the values on 'image-fit' and
'image-position':

  http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-page/#propdef-image-posn
  http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-page/#propdef-image-fit

I suggest that we either (1) stick to the current "image" names but
specify that this can apply to <video> as well, or that we (2) rename
these to 'content-fit' and 'content-position'.

My preference would be (2). 

Here are some relevant posts on the topic.

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Mar/0203.html
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0134.html
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2009Apr/0105.html
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Jun/0184.html
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Jun/0342.html

-h&kon
              Håkon Wium Lie                          CTO °þe®ª
howcome@opera.com                  http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Tuesday, 22 September 2009 15:15:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:21 GMT