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

Re: [css3-images] Comments on object sizing terminology

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 12:29:05 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBJXehPM7Bqz3k0khqw3OWJhgHm5EfLqEtDkG=YwokRhA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 4:41 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday 2012-03-14 15:19 -0700, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 1:05 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
>> > Section 5.1 (Object-Sizing Terminology) at
>> > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/#sizing-terms begins the
>> > definition of "intrinsic dimensions" with the sentence:
>> >  # An object's intrinsic dimensions are its preferred, natural
>> >  # width, height, and aspect ratio, if they exist.
>> > I don't know what "preferred, natural width, height, and aspect
>> > ratio" means.  Are "preferred" and "natural" synonyms, or are they
>> > different things?  Are they, in turn, synonyms for "intrinsic"?
>> > This seems like unnecessary introduction of extra terms.
>>
>> Those aren't meant to be spec-relevant terms; this is a general
>> introductory sentence.  I can remove either "preferred" or "natural",
>> but I don't know how to trim it further without saying something like
>> "An object's intrinsic dimensions are its intrinsic dimensions.".  I'm
>> open to suggestions for better wording.
>
> So it might be that the sentence might be trying to say just:
>  # The term intrinsic dimensions refers to the set of the intrinsic
>  # height, intrinsic width, and intrinsic aspect ratio, which may
>  # or may not exist for a given object.
> or it might be trying to say that plus:
>  # These intrinsic dimensions represent a preferred or natural size
>  # of the object itself, that is, they are not a function of the
>  # context in which the object is used.
>
> Might that (either the first sentence or both) be acceptable
> wording?
>
> (The sequence of terms separated by commas in "preferred, natural
> width, height, and aspect ratio" just doesn't make sense to me.)

Both of those suggestions are excellent!  I've taken them both into
the spec, replacing the first paragraph with the following two:

# <p>The term intrinsic dimensions refers to the set of the intrinsic
height, intrinsic width, and intrinsic aspect ratio, each of which may
or may not exist for a given object. These intrinsic dimensions
represent a preferred or natural size of the object itself, that is,
they are not a function of the context in which the object is
used.</p>

# <p>An object may have no intrinsic dimensions (such as CSS
gradients), only one intrinsic dimension (SVG images designed to scale
may have only an aspect ratio), or all three intrinsic dimensions (all
raster images, for example).  <span class='note'>(Note: an object
cannot have only two intrinsic dimensions, as any two automatically
define the third.)</span></p>

>> > In the definition of "concrete object size", it says:
>> >  # The concrete object size is the result of transforming an
>> >  # object's intrinsic dimensions into a concrete size using its
>> >  # specified size and default object size.
>> > It seems to me that the concrete object size is a value computed
>> > from three inputs (intrinsic dimensions, specified size, and default
>> > object size).  I don't see why it's a transformation of the first in
>> > particular.
>>
>> As far as I can tell, that's already what that sentence is saying.
>
> I'm just saying that the wording appears to imply that one of the
> inputs is somehow different in character from the other two.  I
> think the wording should instead imply that the concrete object size
> is a function of three inputs and not put those inputs into two
> categories.

How about this?

# The <i>concrete object size</i> is the result of combining an
object's <i>intrinsic dimensions</i> and <i>specified size</i> with
the <i>default object size</i> of the context it's used in, producing
a rectangle with a definite width and height.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 15 March 2012 19:29:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 03:48:52 GMT