- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 17:16:46 -0800
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Mar 1, 2012, at 10:42 AM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com> wrote: >> On Thu, 01 Mar 2012 01:34:51 +0100, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Issue 3 - Use of 'bounding box' is undefined, should be 'border box' >>> ======= >>> We need a quick review of the definition of "decorated bounding box" >>> in the spec to make sure it's sane. For CSS, it's the border image >>> area (actually, the smallest rectangle containing the border image >>> areas of every fragment the box may be split into). For SVG, it's the >>> "decorated bounding box", defined in SVG Tiny, which is the smallest >>> rectangle containing both the geometry and the stroke. >> >> >> I suppose the edges of the decorated bounding box for CSS must be vertically >> and horizontally aligned? > > Yes. I can clarify that to be an "axis-aligned rectangle". > >> And the part about transforms being "ignored when >> rendering the element as an image" should also apply when determining the >> d.b.b.? >> >> Not a nitpick this time, I'm not entirely sure how to interpret this part >> w.r.t. transforms. Nobody implements per spec yet? > > Yeah, the intent is that it's based on the box's geometry + border > image area (similar to how SVG's DBB is the geometry + stroke). > Children, even if they're transformed or positioned outside the box, > don't affect this calculation. If you are including the border image, why not also include the box-shadow? It is a decoration too.
Received on Friday, 2 March 2012 01:17:23 UTC