- From: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
- Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 16:16:12 -0500
- To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, David Perrell <davidp@hpaa.com>, Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
I don't like the term text-background since WebKit distinguishes
between fill and stroke of text, and you should be able to supply
unique backgrounds to both.
dave
On Aug 16, 2009, at 3:37 PM, Brad Kemper wrote:
> On Aug 16, 2009, at 12:26 PM, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com> wrote:
>
>> On Aug 15, 2009, at 11:15 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> To be clear: the sucky one was the Webkit idea. My idea of using
>>> text-fill with the full set of background properties shouldn't be
>>> sucky. ^_^ It's approaching the problem in the correct direction.
>>>
>>
>>
>> background-clip: text is not being proposed. :)
>>
>> I agree with the idea of enhancing text-fill.
>
> How about something called "text-background" that has all all the
> background-* properties preceded by "text-"? The values for text-
> background-clip would be different ("glyph", "line" or "all"). If
> "text-background-clip: glyph" or "text-background-clip: line", then
> a 100% height for background-size would mean from the top of the
> line to the baseline. "text-background-clip: line" would repeat the
> background on every line, and "text-background-clip: glyph" would
> repeat the background on every glyph.
>
> This would create a lot of equivelance between filling text and
> filling backgrounds, so it would be easy to learn and quick to move
> from editors draft to recommendation. And you then wouldn't need
> text-fill.
>
Received on Sunday, 16 August 2009 21:17:00 UTC