- From: Leif Arne Storset <lstorset@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 11:50:31 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org
- Cc: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>, "Simon Pieters (zcorpan)" <simonp@opera.com>
- Message-ID: <op.vpwwehoztmo5g6@nynorsk>
I was asked recently whether and why 'object-fit: none' was removed from the spec. Digging in the archives, it seems the proposal to keep/revive it was forgotten amid other issues. So this is a request to re-introduce 'none' as a value for 'object-fit'. The definition would be "Render the content at its intrinsic dimensions, overflowing if necessary." The use case is easy centering or positioning images without scaling them. Centering images vertically in a box can be a PITA today, especially if you don't know the dimensions. With image-fit:none, it is super-easy. Have a look at the attached demo (only supported in Opera 11, AFAIK). (To avoid any confusion: There were objections to our proposal of another value, 'object-fit: auto', because the proposal was that behavior depend on content type. These issues do not affect the current proposal of 'object-fit: none', since no content-type negotation takes place for 'object-fit: none'.) Some previous correspondence is quoted below. Leif Arne Storset <lstorset@opera.com> skreiv Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:09:03 +0100 > Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> skreiv Thu, 18 Feb 2010 09:00:56 +0100 > >> On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 00:01:06 +0100, fantasai >> <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: >> >>> On 01/21/2010 06:56 AM, Simon Pieters wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Regarding image-fit and image-position: >>>> >>>> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-page/#propdef-image-fit >>>> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-page/#propdef-image-posn ... >>>> * Missing "none" >>>> >>>> The none value only seems to be documented in the example and is not >>>> actually part of the property according to the current draft. >>>> >>>> Suggestion: In the image-fit definition, add "none" to the list of >>>> values. In the description, add the following: >>>> >>>> none >>>> Render the content at its intrinsic dimensions, overflowing if >>>> necessary. >>> >>> Hmm, the intention was to remove 'none', because we couldn't come up >>> with a use case. Are you saying we should add it back? >> >> We've implemented it, and it seems useful for easy centering or >> positioning images without scaling them. Centering images vertically in >> a box can be a PITA today, especially if you don't know the dimensions. >> With image-fit:none, it is super-easy. > > The meeting minutes say that interpretation of the 'none' value depends > on the model for negotiation between box and content [2], and that Opera > Software asserted this value was necessary for SVG. I believe you may > have confused 'none' with 'auto' in this case, as the negotiation model > and SVG are important for 'auto' but not really for 'none'. Simon > Pieters's use case for 'none' was centering unscaled content in a large > box, something that is difficult now but trivial with 'image-fit: none'. > > Due to this confusion I suggest you reconsider the value 'none' at your > next meeting. . > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Feb/0164.html -- Leif Arne Storset Core Technology Developer, Opera Software Oslo, Norway
Attachments
- text/html attachment: object-fit-none_demo.html
Received on Wednesday, 26 January 2011 10:50:49 UTC