- From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2013 18:53:51 +0000
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Dec 26, 2013, at 7:39 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > On 12/17/2013 04:24 AM, Dirk Schulze wrote: >> >> Short summary of the latest changes regarding reference boxes after the discussion on this thread. >> >> * I removed the sentence stating that the mask painting area is limited >> to the bounding client rect on mask-clip: no-clip > > Looks good. (Btw, s/rectricted/restricted/ in the previous <dd>s.) Fixed. > >> * I added the keyword bounding-box to mask-origin. The keyword references >> the bounding client rect > > OK. I'm going to think about that after we've sorted the rest of this; > it may need to change to something else if it does not in fact correspond > exactly to the bounding client rect. > >> * I changed the definition of bounding client rect to: >> “”The object bounding box for elements in the http://www.w3.org/2000/svgnamespace and without an associated CSS layout box. The smallest rectangle that contains the border box of the element and the border boxes of all its descendants otherwise. (See getBoundingClientRect [CSSOM-VIEW].)”" > > Move "otherwise" to the front of the sentence so it's more clearly > interpreted as a link between the two sentences. Otherwise, looks > pretty clear. Fixed. > > My remaining concern here is how this box behaves wrt fragmentation. > That particular definition is in conflict with the explanation in > 'clip-path' of how the clipping path is fragmented. I am not sure if it is. bounding-box defines a reference box and does not effect fragmentation differently than the other property values. Even though I wish it would! It would be more pleasant to not fragment the clipping path for this value. > >> * I added an optional <box> value and bounding-box keyword to clip-path >> so that authors can choose the reference box. The syntax now looks like: >> <clip-source> | [ <basic-shape> || <box> | bounding-box ] | none > > Seems reasonable. Minor comments: > > # If specified in combination with a <basic-shape> it is the reference > # box for the <basic-shape>. > > Suggest s/is/provides/ Fixed. > > # If specified by itself a clipping path is computed based on one of > # border-box, margin-box, border-box, padding-box or content-box which > # use their respective boxes including curvature from border-radius, > # similar to background-clip [CSS3BG]. > > Suggest replacing with > > | If specified by itself, uses the edges of the specified box, including > | any corner shaping. Done. > > Also, suggest folding the ''margin-box'' definition in with ''<box>'' > by putting the both <dt>s before the <box> definition. The definition > for <box> (including its reference to Shapes) is exactly what's needed > here. Done. > > # The size of the box is determined by the bounding client rect. > > I think you mean > > | The reference box is the bounding client rect. Fixed. > > ? > >> * The default reference box for basic shapes on clip-path is border-box > > I'm happy for mask-origin and clip-path to agree on the default box. > >> * I defined how container breaks affect masking and clipping for each >> of the source referencing properties. > > See conflict above with definition of 'bounding-box' for boxes fragmented > within a page. I am happy to discuss this further. Thanks a lot, Dirk > > Thanks~ > > ~fantasai >
Received on Friday, 27 December 2013 18:54:24 UTC