- From: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
- Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 20:57:25 -0600
- To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Jan 25, 2009, at 6:08 PM, Håkon Wium Lie wrote:
>
> - however, I'm not sure if I like the described behavior, for several
> reasons:
>
> 1) it seems counter-intuitive that 'border-image' should override the
> more purpose-built background properties
>
> 2) at a more practical level, the described behavior will create more
> manual work. Consider this image:
>
> http://people.opera.com/howcome/2009/tests/borders/picture.jpg
>
> I'd like to use the frame in the picture in other contexts. To do
> so, however, I need to edit the picture to:
>
> -- remove the man inside and replace him with a transparent field
> -- save it in a format that supports transparency (i.e., not jpg)
>
> Rather, I'd like to use the jpg image directly and just set a
> background on the element to cover the man:
>
> div {
> background: black;
> border-image: url(picture.jpg) 125 125 125 125 stretch stretch;
> }
>
> So, how about placing the background from the 'border-image' be at the
> bottom of the stack instead? Or, perhaps even simpler, just clip the
> middle part of the borders image (the one rectangle which is not used
> as a border)?
I brought this issue up a while back as well. I proposed adding an
additional parameter to border-image that would indicate whether or
not the middle part of the border's image should be clipped out. I
still prefer it as the solution to this problem. If I recall
correctly, the general response was "just use transparency."
dave
(hyatt@apple.com)
Received on Monday, 26 January 2009 02:58:11 UTC