W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2011

Re: list-style-image was(Re: [CSS WG] Minutes and Resolutions 2011-02-23)

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 14:34:36 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=VnrRhGS_nviCw42=aWhNAU=w0Yw9R=-LTgvxo@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
Cc: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, W3C style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> This exercises the "percentage intrinsic widths" thing, which we
> explicitly don't support in CSS any longer, if I understand correctly.

To be more specific, the suggestion to remove mention of percentage
intrinsic widths was made in
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Nov/0077.html>,
discussed at the following telcon
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Nov/0249.html> and
decided at the following telcon
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Nov/0264.html>.

The relevant section of SVG 1.1 Second Edition notes is
<http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/master/coords.html#IntrinsicSizing>.
 It explains how percentage values in @width/@height do *not* provide
an intrinsic width or height for the image; they merely affect the
size of the <svg> element within the image after the image's size has
been negotiated.

Opera's (and I guess IE9's) behavior is correct here, but as far as
CSS is concerned, the bullet is always a 1em square in every example
you provided.  SVG just draws within that square in different ways.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 25 February 2011 22:35:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:37 GMT