- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 11:33:58 -0700
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com>, public-fx@w3.org
On 03/26/2010 06:49 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > I've committed a first draft of the View Boxes section to the dev copy > of CSS3 Images. This needs some revision, and I think it may be a > good idea to expand this into a more complete description of how > background images are handled in CSS. > > Any feedback is appreciated, particularly if what I have specified is > somehow inaccurate. I'd also like to know just what CSS's behavior is > for an image with an intrinsic width but not an intrinsic height (or > vice versa). So... Step 2 in your algorithm is completely wrong. Intrinsic sizes do not win against specified sizes. The rules for resolving the size of a CSS view box are not simple, and do not belong in this spec. (I suggest hanging out in CSS2.1 Chapter 10 for a bit, and then reading up on image-fit and image-position if you don't believe me.) Also, seam carving is a method of scaling images that doesn't scale them evenly; it's not about clipping content. I like how you define the terms and then list the negotiation steps, but yes, it needs some revision. Mainly clipping, I think. :) And some terminology changes, because Java applets are not images but they follow the same rules. ~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 27 April 2010 18:34:40 UTC