- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2013 09:34:18 -0800
- To: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Dec 31, 2013, at 2:45 AM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > For sliced box-decoration the spec says: ¡°[¡] at a break [¡] ¡®border-radius¡¯ does not apply to its corners¡±[1] > > I interpret the rest of the text that the behavior of ¡®border-radius¡¯ should be unchanged. Is that correct? My question is about ¡®border-radius¡¯ on one of the original corners that overlaps a break. See example in the fiddle: > > http://jsfiddle.net/QBK7W/ > > The border-radius in the example is 80px and therefore in the middle of a break. The behavior of Safari/Chrome, Firefox and IE differ between each other. > > 1) Safari/Chrome do as I interpret the spec. The border-radius continues on the next fragment. > 2) Firefox changes the border-radius (individually for top and bottom border) so that it fits in the current fragment and does not continue on the next fragment. > 3) IE behaves like box-decoration-break: clone was specified. The corners on the break have a border-radius. > > The spec is clear that behavior 3) is not wanted. I think the spec implies that 1) is the correct behavior. Would it be possible to get normative text or an example in the spec that clarifies the correct behavior? > > Greetings, > Dirk > > [1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-break/#break-decoration WebKit seems to be doing the right thing. What wording is there that would justify what Gecko is doing? I'm not opposed to clarifying the text, but I don't see how it is confusing enough to say that Firefox's behavior is anything but a bug.
Received on Tuesday, 31 December 2013 17:34:51 UTC