- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 11:17:43 +1100
- To: Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com> wrote: > 4. Shapes from Image [2] > > What happens when the image would require 2+ paths to enclose the specified > pixels is currently undefined. > > Imagine a simple image with, from top to bottom: > - A black fully opaque (alpha=1) rectangle > - A white fully transparent (alpha=0) rectangle > - Last, another black fully opaque rectangle. > > What is the resulting float area for shape-image-threshold:0.5? Or, more > specifically, how many float areas does this produce? Should: > > A. The resulting path enclose both black rectangles and thus include the > transparent white rectangle between them? > B. Or do we end up with one path for each of the black rectangles and > adjoining inline elements are able to 'slide' into the area covered by the > middle white transparent rectangle? > > For Level 1 my initial inclination was to consider A optimal as covers the > primary use-cases i.e. only one float area is produced per image. But it > seems polygons may also produce such situations e.g. by positioning vertices > outside the reference box? I don't understand how you would do A. You've presented a simplified scenario where taking the axis-aligned bounding box works, but that fails the moment you do anything less trivial. > 6.2 The 'shape-image-threshold' Property [4] > > I think this section (or possibly section 4) should include a statement such > as a the following: > > # The absence of any pixels with an alpha value larger than the specified > # threshold results in an empty float area. Yeah. ~TJ
Received on Friday, 6 December 2013 00:18:31 UTC