- From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 13:37:53 -0800
- To: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Hey all, The current draft of the spec says that the coordinate system and resolved percentages for declared shapes uses the border box of the element. I am thinking it might make more sense to use the content box of the element. As it stands, specifying a 100% width and height rectangle to shape-inside can change how its inline content is laid out (depending on the border and padding). If we change the coordinate system and percentages to use the content box, then a 100% width and height rectangle for shape-inside changes nothing, and modifications to percentages are relative to what you'd get without defining a shape-inside. As for shape-outside, the current definition says that a 100% width and height rectangle for shape-outside on a float would shrink the float area from the margin box to the border box. Making the change would further shrink the float area to the content box, which isn't any less confusing than before. I'm assuming a single, consistent definition of how lengths and percentages work with shapes is preferable to having separate definitions for shape-inside and shape-outside (particularly when you're using the same shape for both). And on a related note, the shape-outside:auto value says that the shape is computed based on the border box of the element. I'm assuming this should be amended to say that it's computed based on the border box for exclusions, or computed based on the margin box for floats. Thanks, Alan
Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2012 21:38:23 UTC