Re: Border-Images and 'round': CSS Backgrounds and Borders Module Level 3

Brad Kemper wrote:
> 
> On Sep 29, 2009, at 7:44 PM, fantasai wrote:
> 
>> Brad Kemper wrote:
>>> Does anyone remember why it is reduce-only? If it is a matter of the 
>>> tile losing resolution as it grows, I think that is more acceptable 
>>> for the smaller adjustments that may be needed that having much 
>>> larger adjustments required.
>>
>> It's reduce-only to avoid losing resolution, yes. Probably that 
>> restriction
>> should be lifted for vector images at least.
> 
> At least. At worst, the raster image will be no worse that images with 
> the "stretch" keyword. If authors are concerned, they can build more 
> resolution into their source images, or have them scaled down in 
> 'border-image-width'.
> 
> Or, alternately, we could favor reductions by having any space that was 
> less than say 25% of a tile size result in widening, and everything else 
> resulting in width reduction.

Ok, I've updated the spec to say this.
   http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/csswg/css3-background/Overview.src.html.diff?r1=1.167&r2=1.168&f=h

Bert, do you agree with this change?

~fantasai