W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2012

Re: CSS3 Images issues needing WG review

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 10:42:11 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDA6skw=M50cFscMceUkEa9O0eEw526yUBDE9uh0fxEw+g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Mar 2012 01:34:51 +0100, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Issue 3 - Use of 'bounding box' is undefined, should be 'border box'
>> =======
>> We need a quick review of the definition of "decorated bounding box"
>> in the spec to make sure it's sane.  For CSS, it's the border image
>> area (actually, the smallest rectangle containing the border image
>> areas of every fragment the box may be split into).  For SVG, it's the
>> "decorated bounding box", defined in SVG Tiny, which is the smallest
>> rectangle containing both the geometry and the stroke.
> I suppose the edges of the decorated bounding box for CSS must be vertically
> and horizontally aligned?

Yes.  I can clarify that to be an "axis-aligned rectangle".

> And the part about transforms being "ignored when
> rendering the element as an image" should also apply when determining the
> d.b.b.?
> Not a nitpick this time, I'm not entirely sure how to interpret this part
> w.r.t. transforms. Nobody implements per spec yet?

Yeah, the intent is that it's based on the box's geometry + border
image area (similar to how SVG's DBB is the geometry + stroke).
Children, even if they're transformed or positioned outside the box,
don't affect this calculation.

Suggestions on better ways to state this?

Received on Thursday, 1 March 2012 18:42:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:56 UTC