That seems reasonable to me. On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:11 PM, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com> wrote: > Basing what to do off > > http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-background/#box-decoration-break > > (or a similar new property) might be interesting. > > dave > (hyatt@apple.com) > > On Nov 16, 2010, at 2:56 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 10:23 PM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote: > >> One approach would be to simply draw the two halves of a split block as if >> the transform had been applied before the box was split. >> > > Couldn't the same approach be taken for inlines? This just sounds like a > third option. > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: > >> On 11/16/10 1:23 AM, Simon Fraser wrote: >> >>> I think handling transforms on split block element is easier, because >>> they are not irregularly shaped >>> >> >> Is that true, though? How are blocks splitting across columns any more >> regularly shaped than inlines splitting across lines? > > > I think that transforming using the bounding box of the individual boxes is > the simplest solution. It does what the developer wants in most cases and > has well-defined behavior in the cases where it has unexpected behavior. > Also, I think in the cases where it has unexpected behavior, it's relatively > straightforward to understand what's going on. > > It doesn't seem like there was any opposition to this approach in > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Aug/0615.html, although > Boris was maybe skeptical it was actually less confusing. > > Ojan > > >Received on Wednesday, 17 November 2010 01:34:01 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:40 UTC