- From: Noam Rosenthal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2025 06:24:22 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Sounds reasonable on first thought. Though avoiding overlapping also quickly becomes complex. Should borders also be accounted for? Should different shapes be handled differently (e.g. `scoop` vs. `notch` or `round`)? What about `<length>`s vs. `<percentage>`s as border radii? What about different values for horizontal and vertical radii? In a previous resolution we concluded on not considering borders here, only the outer contour. It simplifies things a lot. Note that radii on the same axis are already constrained. I think this is a question of whether we constrain the radii or the shape to not overlap diagonally in the outer contour. The rest would fall into place. > > Also, should there be an option to control this constraint? I assume there are use cases, for which overlapping is actually expected to achieve specific effects for split backgrounds. (Those might also be achievable via `border-shape`, though, depending on specifics in its definition.) Since we don't allow it for border-radius currently I think we should stick with that. The edge cases for overlapping borders are sufficiently edgy. > > Sebastian -- GitHub Notification of comment by noamr Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12098#issuecomment-2817739214 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 21 April 2025 06:24:23 UTC