- From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 17:04:23 +1100
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- CC: public-css-testsuite@w3.org
Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 10/14/10 1:01 AM, Alan Gresley wrote: [snip] >> Yes if you think this is correct. >> >> <http://css-class.com/test/svg/background-position2.xml> > > So in this case the intrinsic width of the <svg> is 100% and the > intrinsic height is also 100%, right? It also has no intrinsic ratio. > > Then per CSS 2.1 section 10.3.2 its intrinsic width is 100% of the > containing block width, and since height and width are styled auto that > becomes the used value for width. > > Per CSS 2.1 section 10.6.2 the percentage intrinsic height is ignored > (because the parent is auto height). So this rule in 10.6.2 applies: > "the used value of 'height' must be set to the height of the largest > rectangle that has a 2:1 ratio, has a height not greater than 150px, and > has a width not greater than the device width". > > So the net result is the <svg> ends up the width of the viewport and > 150px high. Thank you for that Boriz. It now makes sense. [snip] >> Safari seems to show it correct with no clipping. > > For some definitions of "correct" that don't match the current CSS 2.1 > text... > > -Boris Ok, after your explanation, it is Safari that is buggy by not respecting 10.3.2 and 10.6.2. -- Alan http://css-class.com/ Armies Cannot Stop An Idea Whose Time Has Come. - Victor Hugo
Received on Thursday, 14 October 2010 06:04:51 UTC