- 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