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

Re: 'border-image' confusion

From: Eric A. Meyer <eric@meyerweb.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 10:51:38 -0500
Message-Id: <a06230907c964a189e014@[192.168.1.128]>
To: www-style@w3.org
At 7:45 AM -0800 1/25/11, Brad Kemper wrote:

>On Jan 25, 2011, at 7:08 AM, Eric A. Meyer wrote:
>
>>    In case that last assertion seems dubious, I put a 
>>'border-image' scenario to the readers of meyerweb[1].  A number of 
>>them came up with the right answer but complained about the 
>>property being very counter-intuitive.  Others hacked around the 
>>problem entirely using other methods because they couldn't figure 
>>out how to do what I specified, or couldn't figure out how 
>>'border-image' was supposed to work in the first place.  (And a 
>>couple of people got it to work in WebKit, but we're still not sure 
>>if that was a bug exploit or not.[2])
>
>>  I can't see a good reason why it should behave as it does now, 
>>where slices get replaced with transparency if your slices exceed 
>>half the height/width of the base image.  Note that WebKit already 
>>does this, but other browsers do not.
>
>>  [1] http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2011/01/24/border-imaging/
>>  [2] 
>>http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2011/01/24/border-imaging/#comment-531046
>
>The webkit implementation is based on an older and less mature 
>version of the spec. Firefox is doing it correctly according to the 
>spec...

    I gotta say the older, less mature version of the spec is much 
better at supporting the simple case as well as the complex 
("framed") cases.  I'd love to know why the change was proposed and 
decided upon, because in the absence of a really compelling reason 
I'd love to see that part of the spec rolled back to how it used to 
be.

-- 
Eric A. Meyer (eric@meyerweb.com)     http://meyerweb.com/
Received on Tuesday, 25 January 2011 15:52:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:36 GMT