- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 23:08:03 -0700
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
- Message-Id: <2632883E-6978-4991-AC82-F5463444D817@gmail.com>
On Apr 13, 2009, at 4:10 PM, fantasai wrote: > Hello www-style, > I've posted a summary of the major open issues we've been discussing > here on css3.info: http://www.css3.info/border-image-issues/ > > Feel free to comment here, there, or in the appropriate threads. :) > > ~fantasai I had a few more thoughts about the numbered red list on that page: • If there is a border image, the ‘border-style’ is ignored (i.e., drawn as if it were ‘none’) That's not quite right. Ignored, yes, but not as if 'border-style' were 'none'. If it was 'none', it would be the same as if 'border- width' was zero, and thee element would take up less space if it had dimension, or the padding would be in a different place if it was auto sized. A transparent border-color would be a better way to described the intended effect (to avoid jumping around geometry as the images load). • It is unknown if it is a requirement that edges can be set to be as thick as ‘border-width’ (e.g., to set the thickness to ‘thick’). So far, without a way to scale the images evenly by a percentage, 'border-width' is the only way to specify a single number that would scale all sides evenly (and that's only if all sides have the same 'border-width'). So I don't know if scaling by 'border-width' is a requirement, but there should be a simple way to scale all sides by the same factor OR individually by side (and percentage is the obvious choice). Scaling by border-width is, meh, O.K. and maybe useful sometimes, but considerably less desirable and useful. • It is unknown if it is a requirement that the outer edge of the border image can be placed elsewhere than at the border edge – one can probably just move the border edge itself, by giving the box more/less padding and margin. It is considerably less desirable to have to resize the box or give it negative margin in order to adjust the image position, and then have to readjust padding, etc. to put the contents back in the right place (and this is very ugly when the images haven't loaded yet or will never load). • The border image has no influence on the size of the box: the margin edge, border edge, padding edge and content edge do not depend on it in any way. I (obviously) agree with this point, above, but it seems to be contradicting the one before it. • It is unknown what should happen when the border image is scaled to be too big for the box: do the nine parts overlap, are they clipped, scaled down? I initially thought it should clip, but I've changed my mind and now favor scaling. It may not be possible to get reasonable clipping. For images optimized for border-image its almost guaranteed that any clipping would cut off something important. Also, the fact that border- radius scales when there is not enough room suggests similar behavior would be appropriate. This could even be used intentionally with an over-large image to intentionally get a fluidly resizable border pattern.
Received on Friday, 17 April 2009 06:08:43 UTC