- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 01:41:37 +0200
- To: www-style@w3.org
- Cc: bert@w3.org
Hi,
I wonder why the current box model draft still lacks of opportunitys
to specify anything beyond clipping retangular boxes. I miss the ability
to define "clipping" circles, polygons and clipping depending on
replaced content's transparency. Especially I miss the ability to define
an image map framework as available through HTML markup or linking
shapes in SVG.
SVG is a nice solution for image maps in general, since it defines
linking regions of the graphic in the graphic, rather than outside, but
this is still required for most raster graphics formats.
I am, by the way, not happy with the border-radius property in the
current draft. It changes the retangular nature of the box visually, so
it should change this nature also logically. Defining a generic method
to change the retangular nature of boxes would solve dependencies of
other properties (e.g. 'background' and the proposed 'box-shadow'
properties).
Several graphic formats also provide means to specify transparency. It's
a quite common effect in desktop publishing and word processing to let
text only flow around acutally visual parts of graphics. CSS should also
provide means to achieve such effects.
Section 23 of the current drafts reads by the way:
[...]
Note that the 'clip' property only has effect on elements that have a
'overflow' property with a value other than 'visible'. <shape> is
either 'rect(...)' or 'inset(...)'. Values have the following
meanings:
[...]
'Has' should be replaced by 'may have' since the overflow property may
be set to 'auto' and therfore depend on the user agent whether the clip
property does apply to that box.
regards,
--
Björn Höhrmann { mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de } http://www.bjoernsworld.de
am Badedeich 7 } Telefon: +49(0)4667/981028 { http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
25899 Dagebüll { PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 } http://www.learn.to/quote/
Received on Saturday, 15 September 2001 19:42:13 UTC