Re: [css-masking] 'mask: none' clear all masking operations

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Simon Fraser <> wrote:

> Does it mean that I would end up with something like:
> mask: layer url(mask1.png) url(mask2.png) box url(border-mask.png);
> That sprinkling of keywords inside a value seems very unusual and
> confusing. I didn't like it for gradient functions, and it seems even odder
> here. And I'm not sure how people would interpret "layer" in this context.
> Can't we solve the element vs. layer issue by inventing a new url
> function, like ref()? In SVG we could say that url() behaves like ref(),
> but for HTML assume that a url() in the mask shorthand refers to a
> mask-layer image?

What do you mean by "in SVG" and "for HTML"?

Currently "mask:url(foo)" is defined by SVG to be a resource reference, not
an image reference. We can't really change that or make it behave
differently "in HTML".

Per the CSS3 Image Values spec, authors could write"mask:
image(url(mask1.png)) url(mask2.png)". Then we'd be asking authors to
unprefix "-webkit-mask: url(foo)" to "mask:image(url(foo))".

Jtehsauts  tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy  Mdaon  yhoaus  eanuttehrotraiitny  eovni
le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o  Whhei csha iids  teoa
stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d  'mYaonu,r  "sGients  uapr,e  tfaokreg iyvoeunr,
'm aotr  atnod  sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t"  uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n?  gBoutt  uIp
waanndt  wyeonut  thoo mken.o w  *

Received on Tuesday, 16 July 2013 04:57:43 UTC