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

RE: [CSS2.1] list-style-image sizing rules don't match reality

From: Arron Eicholz <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 23:47:13 +0000
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <07349ECFC3608F48BC3B10459913E70B12CFD5D6@TK5EX14MBXC132.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
On Monday, March 07, 2011 9:37 AM fantasai wrote:
> On 02/23/2011 10:59 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> >
> > Here's an edited proposal, somewhat rearranged for added clarity.
> > Now, each step "finishes" an image - as soon as you hit the one that
> > you pass the condition for, you can abort with a properly-sized image.
> >
> > | 1. If the image has a intrinsic width and height, the used width and
> > | height are the same.
> > |
> > | 2. Otherwise, if the image has an intrinsic ratio and either an
> > | intrinsic width or an intrinsic height, the used width/height is the
> > | same as the provided intrinsic width/height, and the used value of
> > | the missing dimension is calculated from the provided dimension and
> > | the ratio.
> > |
> > | 3. Otherwise, if the image has an intrinsic ratio, the used width is
> > | 1em and the used height is calculated from this width and the
> > | intrinsic ratio.  If this would produce a height larger than 1em,
> > | then the used height is instead set to 1em and the used width is
> > | calculated from this height and the intrinsic ratio.
> > |
> > | 4. Otherwise, the image's used width is its intrinsic width if it
> > | has one, or else 1em.  The image's used height is its intrinsic
> > | height if it has one, or else 1em.
> 
> Here's a proposal that reduces the number of edits
> 
> Original text:
> 
>   # The size of the image is calculated from the following rules:
>   #
>   # 1. If the image has an intrinsic width or height, then that intrinsic
>   #    width/height becomes the image's used width/height.
>   # 2. If the image's intrinsic width or height is given as a percentage,
>   #    then that percentage is resolved against 1em.
>   # 3. If the image has no intrinsic ratio and a ratio cannot be calculated
>   #    from its width and height, then its intrinsic ratio is assumed to be 1:1.
>   # 4. If the image has a width but no height, its height is calculated
>   #    from the intrinsic ratio.
>   # 5. If the image's height cannot be resolved from the rules above, then
>   #    the image's height is assumed to be 1em.
>   # 6. If the image has no intrinsic width, then its width is calculated from
>   #    the resolved height and the intrinsic ratio.
> 
> First, remove rules #3 and #6.
> 
> Second, replace rule #4 with
> 
>   | 4. If the image has a width but no height or vice versa, the missing
>   |    dimension is calculated from the intrinsic ratio (if any).
> 
> Third, replace rule #5 with
>   | 5. If the image's width or height cannot be resolved from the rules above,
>   |    then that dimension is assumed to be 1em.
> 

Thank you for your feedback. The CSSWG has addressed your concerns in the upcoming publication of the CSS 2.1 specification[1]. 

The CSSWG resolved to update the specification:

   # 1. If the image has an intrinsic width or height, then that intrinsic
   #    width/height becomes the image's used width/height.
   # 2. If the image's intrinsic width or height is given as a percentage,
   #    then that percentage is resolved against 1em.
   # 3. If the image has a width but no height or vice versa, the missing
   #    dimension is calculated from the intrinsic ratio (if any).
   # 4. If the image's width or height cannot be resolved from the rules above,
   #    then that dimension is assumed to be 1em.

We hope this closes your issue.

Please respond before 18 March, 2011 if you do not accept the current resolution.

[1] http://w3.org/TR/CSS


Received on Monday, 14 March 2011 23:47:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:38 GMT