W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2013

Re: [css-shapes] Optional radius arguments for ellipse shapes

From: Bem Jones-Bey <bjonesbe@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 10:01:46 -0800
To: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
CC: "www-style@w3.org Style" <www-style@w3.org>, "rob.buis@samsung.com" <rob.buis@samsung.com>
Message-ID: <85566176-437F-4F29-80AA-124FFB498AD2@adobe.com>

On Dec 2, 2013, at 12:43 , Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> wrote:

> On 12/2/13, 11:55 AM, "Bem Jones-Bey" <bjonesbe@adobe.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Alan, et al.
>> 
>> Rob (cc'd) and I were talking about parsing of ellipse shapes[1], and we
>> noticed that the grammer seems to say that both <shape-radius> arguments
>> or none must be supplied, when the spec makes it sound like it would be
>> valid for just one <shape-radius> to be supplied, causing the second to
>> default to closest-side[2]. I believe that the grammar is what is
>> incorrect in this case, but can you clarify?
> 
> I went back and forth on this issue, but for this draft decided to match
> the radial gradient syntax [1] which either allows you to omit both radii
> or requires you to supply both. The part of the spec that mentions the
> defaults only comes up if both radii are omitted. I was thinking that
> consistency was more important than defining a shortcut for what I assume
> will be a seldom-used case where an ellipse has a definite x-radius and a
> y-radius of closest-side.
> 
> That said, I just noticed that radial gradients do not allow two keywords
> for ellipse radii, while shapes currently does. I expect this is to cover
> the *-corner keywords that would not make sense as a single ellipse
> radius. So we could consider diverging further if you think this case is
> important enough. Iím leaning towards keeping the draft as it is.

I don't have a strong opinion either way, this is definitely a corner case. So I'm happy to leave the draft as it is.

Thanks,
- Bem
Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2013 18:02:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:17 UTC