W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2012

Re: [css3-exclusions] remove <fill-rule> from "polygon()" syntax

From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 13:55:30 -0700
To: Bear Travis <betravis@adobe.com>, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CC627BF9.11EBA%stearns@adobe.com>
(I hope I fixed the quoting correctly)

On 8/28/12 12:17 PM, "Bear Travis" <betravis@adobe.com> wrote:

>On 8/28/12 11:29 AM, "Dirk Schulze" <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote:
>>On Aug 28, 2012, at 8:50 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 6:45 AM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
>>>>I think the keywords for <fill-rule> should be removed from the syntax
>>>>of 'polygon()'[1]. I think the shapes on the exclusion spec can be
>>>>reused in other contexts as well. One example is <shape> as shorthand
>>>>for 'clip-path' in the CSS Masking[2] spec. But for 'clip-path' we
>>>>already have the 'clip-rule' property with the values 'nonzero' and
>>>>'evenodd' [3].
>>>>I would suggest using the 'fill-rule' property from SVG [4] to specify
>>>>the fill rule on 'polygon()'. This property is already implemented by
>>>>all browsers anyway.
>>>I don't see how that works, if shape functions are going to be usable
>>>in multiple properties.
>>We have clip-rule and fill-rule. So where is the problem?
>What would the effect be on CSS Exclusions? [1]
>It seems like the css for specifying a shape-inside [2] would change from
>shape-inside: polygon(evenOdd, 0 0, 10px 0, 5px 10px 0 0);
>shape-inside: polygon(0 0, 10px 0, 5px 10px, 0 0);
>fill-rule: evenOdd;
>Is this correct?
>[1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-exclusions/
>[2] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-exclusions/#shape-inside-property


I believe that's what Dirk is asking for. But it sounds to me like it
would need to be an additional property per
property-that-accepted-shape-syntax (fill-rule, clip-rule - what about
shape-inside-rule and shape-outside-rule?). And these new properties would
only apply if the polygon syntax was used. I think it might be better kept
as a parameter in the polygon function.


Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2012 20:56:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:20 UTC