- From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:52:07 -0800
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Nov 19, 2009, at 1:32 PM, fantasai wrote: > fantasai wrote: >> Currently we have as keywords 'continuous' and 'each-box'. They're >> not >> very clear, and one person so far has pointed out that continuous is >> hard to spell. >> How about 'slice' and 'separate'? >> box-break: slice; /* Draw backgrounds and borders as if box was >> not broken, then slice it into pieces */ >> box-break: separate; /* Draw backgrounds and borders separately >> for each box: separate, then draw */ > > Based on the discussion at the telecon this week > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Nov/0265.html > I have decided to change the property syntax from > box-break: continuous | each-box > to > box-break: slice | clone > > Everyone agreed that 'slice' was a clear mnemonic. I chose 'clone' > because each box gets its own copy of the background and border. > It is not 'repeat' because the background and border are not merely > repeating the result: each box gets its own complete set of border > and background bits, which are applied to the box's own size and > position. > > Since this is not a WG resolution, I am open to changing it if we > have consensus on a better proposal. But I think it's pretty good. Didn't we decide that the property name should change to something like "box-decoration-break"? Simon
Received on Thursday, 19 November 2009 23:53:10 UTC