Re: [css4-background] 9-part slicing images in background-image

Adobe Flash had 9-slice graphics for many years. The user adoption to code
complexity/bug ratio was so poor that I wish we never had it. It sure
looked good on paper :)

--Jet


On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote:

>
> On 25/07/2013, at 8:54 AM, Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2013-07-24 at 11:14 +1000, Dean Jackson wrote:
> >> On 24/07/2013, at 11:07 AM, Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, 2013-07-24 at 04:40 +1000, Dean Jackson wrote:
> >>> [...]
> >>>> It's more than backgrounds. As Tab mentions, the idea is a single
> >>>> image resource that can be used anywhere that accepts an image.
> >>>
> >>> Is there a reason why they are restricted to 9 and not also 16 (giving
> >>> centre pieces on the edges)?
> >>
> >> Two reasons come to mind:
> >>
> >> - Designers typically work with 9-part images.
> >
> > I don't think that's true for print.
>
> Can you give examples?
>
> >> - The syntax for 9 part border images is already borderline confusing
> >> (get it? borderline!). Adding any more slices will likely explode
> >> brains.
> >
> > Possibly, but the nested HTML div markup for centred decorations on a
> > border is a pain to get right too,
>
> Really? It's only one level of nesting.
>
> Also, if they want truly centered inner borders, I expect they want 5x5
> images, not 4x4. I think once you get to that level of syntax complexity
> you're going to be better off with nested elements.
>
> > and you can't rely on polyfills for
> > print engines that likely don't have JavaScript.
>
>
> That's true. Again, I think we need examples from the print community. I
> don't follow this list completely, but I can't remember any requests for
> this.
>
> Dean
>
>
>
>