- 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 Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
(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 UTC