W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > July to September 2015

Re: [css-transforms] 'transform-box' defaults in svg

From: Erik Dahlström <erik@xn--dahlstrm-t4a.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 08:11:44 +0200
To: Erik Dahlström <erik@xn--dahlstrm-t4a.net>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.x5pnhuy6fwt8au@localhost.localdomain>
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 01:28:21 +0200, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>  
wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Erik Dahlström <erik@dahlström.net>  
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I was reviewing the 'transform-box' section in the css transforms spec,
>> https://drafts.csswg.org/css-transforms/#transform-box.
>>
>> The initial value of 'transform-box' is 'border-box', which is fine.
>> However, the spec continues to state that:
>> "For SVG elements without an associated CSS layout box, the used value  
>> for
>> border-box is view-box."
>>
>> It seems to me that a used value of 'fill-box' in this case would lead  
>> to
>> more easily understood behavior than 'view-box'. So, I'd like to know  
>> what
>> the rationale behind the current choice is.
>>
>> An example, http://jsfiddle.net/fs6cLt38/1/.
>
> Note that 'fill-box' isn't the correct analogue for border-box,  
> stroke-box is.
>
> ~TJ

True, 'stroke-box' might be an even better choice. The current draft  
didn't have that keyword value listed however.
/ed
Received on Tuesday, 29 September 2015 06:12:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:49:54 UTC