- From: Florian Rivoal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 05:40:23 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Thanks for this edit. To bring it fully in line with the resolution, I think you should make the following changes: 1. in the `cover` and `contain` definitions, change “The initial viewport is the [...]” to “The initial layout viewport and the visual viewport are set to the [...]”. (#206 is about properly defining that terminology) 2. I would move the following sentence into a note: “With this value, 'border-boundary: display' and 'shape-inside: display' have no effect”. You are not trying to define new behavior here, just to explain how these two things interact. This is better done as an informative note than as normative text. 3. I would rephrase this sentence: “UA can paint the area which is outside the contained viewport for ‘contain’. ” → “What the UA paints outside of the viewport is undefined. It may be the background color of the canvas, or anything else that the UA deems appropriate.” 4. I don't think your definition of auto really matches the resolution. How about this instead: > How the shape and size of the screen affects the initial layout viewport and the visual viewport is UA-defined, with the constraint that the UA must ensure that all the content can be viewed by the user, including documents designed for rectangular displays and that may have content in the corners. Making ''auto'' behave the same same as ''contain'' is one possible way to meet this requirement, but other approaches involving scrolling, panning, zooming or other mechanisms are encouraged as well. 5. “Because of this, some part of the page is clipped.” –> “Because of this, depending on the size of the viewport, some part of the page may be clipped.” -- GitHub Notification of comment by frivoal Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/171#issuecomment-227345521 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2016 05:40:25 UTC