W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > August 2019

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-images] Should the values of image-orientation include the <angle> variants? (#4164)

From: fantasai via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 23:38:11 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-525074264-1566862690-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@zoltan-dulac 

1. You are correct that `transform` is not an adequate substitute for `image-orientation: <angle>`.
2. Browsers are planning to align on honoring EXIF orientation, so they will interoperate with photo-editing software and album software that honors EXIF. The goal is for everyone to honor EXIF, including browsers.
3. I don't see how `image-orientation` would help services that strip EXIF. If EXIF is stripped, then the image will not be auto-oriented, so the author/service/user needs to rotate the image to be upright. That is true today, it will be true in the future.
4. Orienting images upright is not a stylistic issue, it's a content issue. If CSS is stripped from the document, the images should be correctly-oriented. Therefore any wrongness in the image orientation should be fixed at a lower layer than CSS.

Assuming honoring EXIF by default is Web-compatible, it is the right way to go. At that point `image-orientation` is no longer needed to correctly orient images, and it can be dropped. The only reason to keep it would be if the `<angle>` values were needed for stylistic purposes.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by fantasai
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4164#issuecomment-525074264 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 26 August 2019 23:38:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 19 October 2021 01:31:13 UTC