From: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>

Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 17:05:05 +0100

To: www-style@w3.org

Message-ID: <op.v39yyrofbunlto@oyvinds-desktop>

Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 17:05:05 +0100

To: www-style@w3.org

Message-ID: <op.v39yyrofbunlto@oyvinds-desktop>

On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 14:54:26 +0100, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote: >> I think you're reading it as "use the angle an indicator of the >> location along the partial ellipse of the outer curve, do the same with >> the inner curve, and connect the dots". > > I believe that was the intention. > > I thought this meant that for a 45deg ray, "the point on the curve" > would be where 45deg was perpendicular to the tangent. Is that not > right? It has been a long time since I have been in a geometry class, > and describing a point on a curve as an angle has just never come up in > any of my conversations since then. > > The third rendering doesn't look to me like it is where a 45deg angle > would bisect the outer curve at a place where a tangent to the curve > would be perpendicular to that angle. OK, the above doesn't really make sense to me, but the "tangent" part provides a hint to interpreting the spec in a different way. So it's supposed to pick a point on the border edge curve where the slope is a certain number, then the same for the padding edge curve, and the transition center is a line segment joining those two points? Then maybe t17-tangent.png is actually what the spec intends to say, though nobody's actually implemented that. Not sure it makes sense to choose that slope independently of the border radii, either. -- Øyvind Stenhaug Core Norway, Opera Software ASAReceived on Tuesday, 1 November 2011 16:08:00 UTC

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1
: Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:28:33 UTC
*