- From: Leif Arne Storset <lstorset@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:15:05 +0100
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> skreiv Wed, 29 Feb 2012 00:59:57 +0100 > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> > wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 6:29 AM, Leif Arne Storset <lstorset@opera.com> >> wrote: >>> I reviewed CSS3 Image Values and found no major issues. I did find some >>> minor or editorial issues. Here is the first: >>> >>> Under 3.3 element(), in the sections labelled "Otherwise": >>> >>> | The function represents an image with width and height equal to the >>> | bounding box of the referenced element. >>> >>> [plus several more mentions of "bounding box"] >>> >>> "Bounding box" is not defined in this spec or in CSS 2.1. In other >>> contexts, the term "bounding box" often refers to the total painted >>> area for an element, including shadows and overflow. I suspect >>> "border box" is what is meant, since shadows and some border images are >>> excluded. >> >> Yes, I did indeed mean "border box". Fixed and logged as issue 3. > > I've subsequently changed this usage over to "decorated bounding box", > and defined what that means for CSS and SVG: > <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/#decorated-bounding-box> > > Is this an acceptable definition? Super awesome, as T-Rex would put it. -- Leif Arne Storset Core Technology Developer, Opera Software Oslo, Norway
Received on Wednesday, 29 February 2012 10:15:38 UTC