W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2009

Re: [CSS21] Scaling of replaced elements

From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 23:53:11 -0800
Message-ID: <60cb038a0912292353u7fed5a7dvf0a83255d3ee6edc@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: James Hopkins <james@idreamincode.co.uk>, www-style@w3.org
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 9:35 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> James Hopkins wrote:
>> Currently, the spec [1] states that, for replaced elements with an
>> intrinsic ratio, it is an optional requirement that a UA scale the element.
>> I'd like to propose that the current spec is further clarified so that
>> scaling a replaced element is recommended (SHOULD), as opposed to just
>> optional (MAY).

This makes sense to me.

>> Leaving scaling as optional could (although unlikely) result in a vendor
>> implementing behavior that differs from currently consistent implementations
>> in other browsers - FF, Safari, IE, and Opera all scale replaced elements
>> (which have an intrinsic ratio) in this way. More so, authors have become
>> reliant on the behavior found in these existing implementations, and to
>> allow the possibility of a differing implementation would no doubt affect
>> interoperability.

Doubtful, but possible.  And indeed where interoperability is already
demonstrated, the spec should further direct authors and new
implementations along those lines.

>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#the-width-property
> While for bitmap images this is the right thing to do, other objects
> such as Java applets are also replaced elements, and even if they
> have a preferred size and intrinsic ratio, scaling them graphically
> is rarely the right thing to do.

I doubt this.

Could you provide a concrete / real-world example (with URL) of a Java
applet that *does* have a preferred size/width *and* intrinsic ratio
*and* scaling it graphically would *not* be the right thing to do?

> That said, the sentence as it stands:
>  # The width of a replaced element's box is intrinsic and may be
>  # scaled by the user agent if the value of this property is
>  # different than 'auto'.
> doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, and I have no idea what its
> author intended.
> Tantek, do you have any idea? You were the last person to touch
> that sentence.

1. That sentence has not been touched since REC-CSS2-19980512:

So no, unfortunately I cannot provide any reasoning to why it is so.

2. Based on my understanding/familiarity with that section (and
related chapters), that sentence does not make sense to me. In my
opinion it should be removed.



Received on Wednesday, 30 December 2009 07:54:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:13:41 UTC