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

Re: [css3-images] [css3-background] Image/media fragments and cropping

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 15:09:44 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDQx6S76_rGD=4abjb-fg4mGXx7re0X_=nMLZfVnTq=sg@mail.gmail.com>
To: verdy_p@wanadoo.fr
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Philippe Verdy <verdy_p@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> In note that the [css3-background] module is not consistant with the
> current definition of the [css3-images] module, with regards to image
> fragments, and more generally to the desire of selecting fragments of
> a resource to select a part of the resource to be used as a a source
> of images to render (possibly animated if the resource is a video).
>
> For example the [css3-images] module uses a very unfriendly fragment
> identifier with a fixed keyword to specify cropping parameters
> (#xywh=x,y,w,h). Not only this keyword is ugly, but it also prohibits
> using a resource containing multiple parts (not just one image or one
> video), for example if the resource is a ZIP or JAR archive, or even
> an SVG document, which have their own way to select a part of their
> content and specifying their associated content-type.
>
> For this reason, the syntax for url(resource-url#resource-fragment)
> should remain fixed so that the #resource-fragment remains ONLY
> interpreted according to the content-type of the resource at the given
> resource-url.

CSS did not define that fragment syntax.  As the spec explains and
links, it is defined by the Media Fragments spec:
http://www.w3.org/TR/media-frags/

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 8 November 2012 23:10:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:02 GMT