- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 23:28:58 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
Bert and I went through all the open CSS3 Backgrounds and Borders issues on Monday. Here are our conclusions. If there are no objections, we plan to close the first three categories with the resolutions suggested below after next week's telecon. (The last category needs further discussion.) Issues to Close No Change ------------------------- Rename 'each-box' value of 'background-break' to 'discontinuous'. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/23 ISSUE-23 No change. Bert and I felt 'each-box' is both clearer and easier to type. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-152 Make border-image border widths not affect width calculations. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/27 No change. The current behavior and the proposed behavior address different use cases, and you can approximate the proposed behavior with multiple backgrounds. (The advantage of the current behavior is that you don't lose padding depending on whether border-image is used or not. If the outer width needs to be constant, border-box sizing can be used.) http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-288 Allow 'background-repeat: round' to stretch instead of shrink. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/20 ISSUE-20 No change. In most cases it is better to shrink than to stretch. We didn't see much value in allowing images to stretch here. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-362 Merge 'background-origin' property with something else. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/13 ISSUE-13 No change. Several different properties depend on the value of this property, and it doesn't fit very naturally anywhere else. We plan to merge it with 'background-clip' in the shorthand, however: see Issue 24. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-366 Change name of 'background-size' to something else. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/18 ISSUE-18 No change. The name is not ideal, but there were no significantly better suggestions. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-640 Feature Requests to Reject -------------------------- Proposal for a 'text' value for 'background-clip' http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/17 ISSUE-17 Rejected. Or perhaps "retracted" is more accurate here. We're not against adding the functionality to CSS, it just doesn't fit well as a background. See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Apr/0067.html and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Apr/0066.html http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-136 Allow four coordinates on 'background-position'. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/21 ISSUE-21 Reject. This is very similar to ISSUE-12 (which was also rejected) http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/12 and 'background-size' is a more straightforward syntax for affecting the image size. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-139 Add 'transparent' keyword for centerless border images. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/28 ISSUE-28 Reject. The use case is saving the implementation some effort. However, Bert and I don't think anyone is going to bother using this keyword, and it complicates the syntax. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-333 Make default 'box-shadow' offsets non-zero. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/40 ISSUE-40 Reject. There are good use cases for zero offsets, it's an obvious default, and it matches 'text-shadow'. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-573 Make 'box-shadow' offsets optional. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/40 ISSUE-40 Reject. It makes the syntax very confusing once a 'spread' value is added, since one length would mean a blur radius only whereas two lengths are always interpreted as offsets. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-584 Scale background image relative to its own size http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/19 ISSUE-19 Reject. We didn't come up with any convincing use cases for this feature. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-647 Issues to Close With Changes ---------------------------- Define where background colors are clipped and how this is controlled. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/15 ISSUE-15 Resolve: Background colors are clipped to the same rectangle as the bottommost image. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-80 Positioning of a single tile when 'background-repeat: space'. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/8 ISSUE-8 Resolve: If only only one tile fits, it is positioned according to 'background-position'. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-91 http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-132 Make non-fallback background color optional. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/5 Resolve: Accept: 'background-color: / white' should be equivalent to 'background-color: transparent / white'. Transparent is the most common case here, and making the keyword optional saves some typing, and avoids typos. (It looks more reasonable in the shorthand: 'background: url(semitransparent.png) / white'.) http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-103 'bounding-box' and 'continuous' should affect blocks differently in multi-col http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/43 ISSUE-43 Resolve: Fix 'bounding-box' definition for block to match the definition for inlines. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-162 vertical major writing direction should attach broken backgrounds side-to-side http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/47 ISSUE-47 Resolve: When 'background-break' is 'bounding-box' or 'continuous' broken boxes are attached in the direction of the block progression of the root element (for page breaking) or nearest ancestor multi-column element (for column breaking). http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-172 Define behavior of backgrounds when broken across varying page widths. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/22 ISSUE-22 Resolve: When 'background-break' is 'continuous', each piece draws its background honoring its y-position within the chain, but assuming that the whole element has the same width as this piece. This ensures right-aligned images stay right-aligned, left-aligned images stay left-aligned, and centered images stay centered. When 'background-break' is 'bounding-box', align all boxes by their start border edge before drawing the bounding box. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-246 Define what happens when border radii intersect. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/29 ISSUE-29 Resolve: Reduce all radii in proportion until no radii intersect. This avoids sharp points in the borders while preserving the shape of the box. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-319 Proposal for 'no-clip' value for 'background-clip'. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/16 ISSUE-16 Resolve: Add 'no-clip' value to 'background-clip', mark "at risk". http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-447 Simplify 'background' shorthand by combining clip and origin. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/24 ISSUE-24 Resolve: Allow the 'background' shorthand to take the values for 'background-origin'. Also allow it to take a 'no-clip' keyword, which sets 'background-clip' to 'no-clip'. If 'no-clip' is not present but one of the 'background-origin' keywords are, set 'background-clip' to the same value. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-366 'bg-clip' and 'bg-origin' values should match 'box-sizing' keywords. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/42 ISSUE-42 Resolve: Accept: change 'border' to 'border-box', 'padding' to 'padding-box', and 'content' to 'content-box'. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-471 Add "spread" value to 'box-shadow'. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/41 ISSUE-41 Resolve: Add "spread" as optional fourth length value after "blur". http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-503 Box shadow grammar errors and suggestions. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/40 ISSUE-40 Resolve: Fix grammar errors to match 'text-shadow'. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-584 Define whether box-shadows are drawn inside the element. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/32 ISSUE-32 Resolve: Box-shadows are only drawn outside the element's border-box. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-619 Add 'contain' and 'cover' as keywords for 'background-size'. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/45 ISSUE-45 Resolve: Accept. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-643 Rename 'background-origin' to 'background-box' http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/46 ISSUE-46 Resolve: Bert and I tentatively accept this suggestion, but are open to better names. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080512#l-715 http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20080513#l-3 Issues For WG Discussion ------------------------ Positioning from corners other than top left: http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/10 ISSUE-10 http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/11 ISSUE-11 Positioning fixed distances from the bottom/right edges is a common request. Note that it can be done with calc() by subtracting from 100%, so the question becomes whether an alternative syntax is wanted for usability. Positioning from the start/end edges can't be done with calc(). Multiple borders: http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/25 ISSUE-25 Bert and I are happy to leave this to XBL, but wanted to check that implementors agree. Percentage border widths: http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/26 ISSUE-26 Margins and padding already allow percentages. On the other hand, there would be problems with losing a border due to auto-width calculations that result in the percentage defaulting to zero. Percentage border radii: http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/30 ISSUE-30 A possible snag is whether percentages are relative to a radius's corresponding dimension or if they are relative to the shortest dimension or something else. Inner Box Shadow: http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/44 ISSUE-44 There have been quite a few comments about adding such a feature, or at least an "inner glow" feature (which this would address).
Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2008 06:29:38 UTC