- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 08:43:50 -0700
- To: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org list" <www-style@w3.org>
On Mar 25, 2009, at 12:06 PM, David Hyatt wrote: > http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-css3-background-20080910/#the-border- > image > > contains the following sentence: > > "If the slash is present in the property value, the one to four > values after it are used for the width of the border instead of the > ‘border-width’ properties (but only if the specified image can be > displayed)." > > [..] > > If the image fails to load, it's only going to be after trying for a > while, and therefore an implementation honoring the language above > would end up popping back to the original border-widths as specified > somewhere else, but only after the image load has failed. > > It's best for the border-image to just always set the border widths, > even if the image fails to load. That way on a failure, the entire > box doesn't change size. Is this mainly a problem with the geometry changing? That is, if the width of the image border were the same as the border-width, would you be able to go in and un-paint the border and repaint it with the image many seconds or minutes later (after the image loaded), without too much trouble? If not, because of the complexities of stacking contexts and such, then maybe "failed to load" should be excluded from the fallback feature of this property, and it should only fall back for "user has images turned off" and "UA doesn't support images or this image type".
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2009 15:44:28 UTC