Re: Ambiguities in fill:url() / stroke:url() syntax

On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:48 PM, Dirk Schulze <> wrote:
> Another proposal came from Stephen Zilles during the CSS F2F meeting today. I want to list it beside the different proposals.
> He suggests not doing any heuristics, but follow a predefined default behavior. 'fill', 'stroke', 'mask', 'clip-path' always assume that fragments (which are no media fragments) are treated as resources. For all other properties, they are treated as images.
> For CSS Masking that would mean:
>         mask: url(image.svg#id) is assumed to be a mask resource. At least if it is the only reference. If it has more than one list item, it is treated as image again.
>         mask-image: url(image.svg#id) is assumed to be an image, since the property, by default, takes CSS Images.

>From fantasai, actually.  But yes, this also seem pretty reasonable to me.


Received on Monday, 29 October 2012 21:58:46 UTC