Re: 'border-image' confusion

On Mon, 07 Feb 2011 19:26:36 +0300, Brad Kemper <>  

> On Feb 6, 2011, at 9:10 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> I have a concern about 'border-image-slice'. It doesn't seem to say  
> anything about images without intrinsic dimensions if a <number> is the  
> value. The spec says that "Numbers represent pixels in the image (if the  
> image is a raster image) or vector coordinates (if the image is a vector  
> image)." I don't think that gradients have vector coordinates, and  
> counting pixels from all four sides also doesn't make sense. I think  
> that what would make the most sense for dimensionless images (such as  
> border-image-width) is to make any 'border-image-slice' <number> or  
> <percentage> ignored, and just make it automatically the same as  
> 'border-image-width'.
> 1.

It does make sense with 'fill' keyword which seems to be not supported
by implementations right now (it behaves like 'fill' keyword everywhere
when I checked last time).

Received on Monday, 7 February 2011 17:01:25 UTC