W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2010

Re: [css3-background] border-radius color transitions using gradients ?recommended but undefined

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:09:45 -0600
Message-ID: <dd0fbad1001271009r71c75d57pbfee251dfd452b61@mail.gmail.com>
To: Zack Weinberg <zweinberg@mozilla.com>
Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Zack Weinberg <zweinberg@mozilla.com> wrote:
> Incidentally, those patches use square dots for borders that are less
> than three device pixels wide, which I think should be officially
> allowed.

I think that, when you're dealing with only 2px-wide lines, a square
*is* round as a degenerate case.

>> ‘dotted’
>> A series of round dots, evenly spaced around the entire border
>> (including corners and border radii). The space between dots should
>> be approximately equal to the width of one dot, but this spacing
>> should be adjusted in order to achieve uniform spacing, with no less
>> than .75 dot-width of space between dots. Spacing of dots may be
>> different along vertical border sides than along horizontal border
>> sides, in order to achieve symmetry at the corners.
> I am not sure "no less than .75 dot-width of space between dots" and
> "uniform spacing" are simultaneously achievable under all conditions.
> You should also be aware that it is *mathematically impossible* to draw
> a dotted line which is uniformly spaced, one device pixel wide, an even
> number of device pixels long, and has dots at both ends.  This is,
> unfortunately, a common thing for Web authors to request.  I tried a
> bunch of alternatives and came to the conclusion that the least
> aesthetically offensive fallback is to omit dots at two of the four
> corners of the box (assuming all four sides are drawn).

I think that should be allowed.  (It's how Windows handles dotted
borders when you drag a selection box, after all.)

Received on Wednesday, 27 January 2010 18:10:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:07:42 UTC