- From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2010 08:35:18 -0800
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>, "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
On Dec 2, 2010, at 12:05 am, fantasai wrote: > On 12/01/2010 05:37 PM, Simon Fraser wrote: >> On Nov 30, 2010, at 5:14 PM, fantasai wrote: >> >>> On 11/24/2010 07:34 AM, Øyvind Stenhaug wrote: >>>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/fantasai/submitted/css2.1/backgrounds/background-intrinsic-004.htm >>> >> I read that as the background-image being scaled-to-fit, maintaining aspect ratio, into the background-positioning area. And I >> think <http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/colors.html#propdef-background-position> is telling me that the background-positioning area >> is the padding box. >> >> So the first ".test" has a padding box of 80x100px. green-intrinsic-ratio-portrait.svg has an intrinsic ratio of 4/6. So the >> SVG will be scaled up with a factor of 16.666667, giving a width of 66.666667. Hence there's a gap down each side, and the red >> shows through. >> >> Is my analysis flawed, or is the test invalid? > > The default value of background-position is top left. Does that help? Ah, so the SVG should be flush left in the padding box, with the 13px gap down the right side, rather than a gap down both sides? That points me at where WebKit might be going wrong, thanks. Simon
Received on Thursday, 2 December 2010 16:36:29 UTC