- From: Dirk Schulze via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 19:07:40 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
@fantasai That is right, we would not need to introduce the keywords for `transform-box` to define the mapping to `stroke-box` or `content-box`. Though it seems odd that one needs to define `fill-box` for HTML elements to get `content-box` and `border-box` to get `stroke-box` on SVG elements. Without a way to set the intended reference box directly. None of the UAs actually do support the mapping that the WG resolved on as described in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/999#issuecomment-296057314. Currently implementations do map `view-box` to `border-box` for HTML elements and `border-box` to `fill-box` for SVG elements. Regardless of current UA support, I support the mapping that the WG resolved on but feel like it would be more logical to also add the keywords we map to for used values. -- GitHub Notification of comment by dirkschulze Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/999#issuecomment-392903910 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 29 May 2018 19:07:43 UTC