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

Re: [css3-images] Don't inherit object-fit

From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 06:30:44 +0100
To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Cc: "Leif Arne Storset" <lstorset@opera.com>, Philip J├Ągenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
Message-ID: <op.vpyb9iw9idj3kv@simon-pieterss-macbook.local>
(Forgot to cc relevant Opera people who probably aren't subscribed to  
www-style.)

On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 06:25:35 +0100, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote:

> While we're on a spree with object-fit, could we please make object-fit  
> and object-position not inherit? We asked for this back when we  
> implemented it, and we implemented them to not inherit, and fantasai  
> didn't mind to change the spec, but the spec was never changed.
>
>
> On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 00:01:06 +0100, fantasai  
> <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
>
>>> * Don't inherit
>>>
>>> Inheriting is problematic for SVG because the SVG author probably won't
>>> expect all elements establishing new viewports to suddenly look
>>> different. It is difficult to see what advantages there would be for
>>> other replaced content, except perhaps multiple nested <object>  
>>> fallbacks.
>>>
>>> Suggestion: Do not inherit image-fit and image-position.
>>
>> Yes, the original use case for inheriting was multiple nested <object>
>> fallbacks. If this prevents SVG from mapping preserveAspectRatio to
>> image-fit (or whatever we call it [1]) on the <svg> element itself,
>> then I do not mind changing it.
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Feb/0165.html
>


-- 
Simon Pieters
Opera Software
Received on Thursday, 27 January 2011 05:31:20 GMT

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