Re: [css shapes] Status of our comment I18N-ISSUE-274 [I18N-ACTION-272]

On 12/6/13, 8:56 AM, "Phillips, Addison" <> wrote:

>Hello CSS,
>We notice that CSS Shapes [1] is in Last Call. In July of this year we
>raised an issue [2] related to bidirectionality and Shapes. In the course
>of discussing it, it was suggested [3] that the addition of an "image"
>value to "shape-outside" would address the need for rtlflip-awareness
>(assuming rtlflip is a thing).
>Can you update us on whether you think this sufficiently addresses the
>issue of bidirectional image flipping? Also, whether a note indicating
>the inheritance of flipping behavior might be useful in Section 6.1.

Thanks for the reminder on this.

A keyword to extract a shape from rendered content has been postponed to
level 2. So that portion of how CSS Shapes handles flipping behavior is
out of scope for this module level.

But, we have updated shapes-from-image in two ways.

First, shape-outside now takes an <image> value instead of a bare URL. So
if the flipping switch is defined as an additional <image> value keyword,
you can use that to specify a flipped shape.

Second, a shape-from-image is sized and positioned as if it were a
replaced element with the element’s used content-box size [1]. So if the
flipping switch ends up as a separate property (like object-fit) then the
flip will be handled there.

So I believe the current draft handles the prospective flipping behavior
for shape-outside, unless the flipping switch takes some form not noted

Does this satisfy the I18N WG’s concerns?



Received on Friday, 6 December 2013 21:54:03 UTC