- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:16:29 -0800
- To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
Håkon Wium Lie wrote:
> Also sprach fantasai:
>
> > > 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)?
> >
> > If it's really an issue, we can add an 'empty' keyword to trigger
> > omitting the center part of the image. Or change the behavior and
> > have 'fill' require filling the middle.
>
> A new keyword could fix it. But it's expensive to change the syntax at
> this point.
How is it expensive to change the syntax? It's still a Working Draft, not
even Last Call! And it's /adding/ a keyword, not changing any existing
syntax.
> How about just changing the stacking order so that the border-image goes
> to the bottom?
We can't do that. Backgrounds paint into the border region by default.
Borders sit on top of that. It wouldn't make any sense for border-image
to paint below that.
> This would allow my code to work as expected:
>
> div {
> background: black;
> border-image: url(picture.jpg) 125 125 125 125 stretch stretch;
> }
That wouldn't work, it would make everything black.
~fantasai
Received on Monday, 26 January 2009 21:17:11 UTC