Re: [css3-images] object-* at-risk

On 08/03/2011 12:26 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:01 AM, Leif Arne Storset<>  wrote:
>> Of course, we also implement the 'none' value (which HP may or may not
>> implement) and the 'auto' value (which has been rejected by the WG). AFAIK
>> no-one implements 'scale-down' yet. It would be reasonable to mark 'none'
>> and 'scale-down' as at-risk, if marking parts of a property at-risk is a
>> done thing.
> That seems reasonable.
> Everyone else, does it seem okay to make the object-* properties not
> at-risk, and only mark the "none" and "scale-down" values of
> object-fit as at-risk?

I'd kick them to L4. I disagree with adding 'none', at least.


Received on Wednesday, 3 August 2011 19:53:55 UTC