- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 16:46:56 +0200
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: "www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 16:13:19 +0200, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > Given that transforms don't affect the geometry, I'd assume that the > current non-transform-aware definition of "border box" should be the > appropriate one here. That would make the CSS rendered case different from the SVG rendered case for the purposes of these APIs. I'm happy to use another term than "border box" but I think I want to retain consistency. On the other hand, I suppose one could argue that only transformations affecting layout (if ever) should affect the API. And that since SVG is so woefully different it is ok to use the bounding box there. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 31 August 2010 14:47:32 UTC