- From: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 04:55:20 +1000
- To: liam@w3.org
- Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 25/07/2013, at 8:54 AM, Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org> wrote: > On Wed, 2013-07-24 at 11:14 +1000, Dean Jackson wrote: >> On 24/07/2013, at 11:07 AM, Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 2013-07-24 at 04:40 +1000, Dean Jackson wrote: >>> [...] >>>> It's more than backgrounds. As Tab mentions, the idea is a single >>>> image resource that can be used anywhere that accepts an image. >>> >>> Is there a reason why they are restricted to 9 and not also 16 (giving >>> centre pieces on the edges)? >> >> Two reasons come to mind: >> >> - Designers typically work with 9-part images. > > I don't think that's true for print. Can you give examples? >> - The syntax for 9 part border images is already borderline confusing >> (get it? borderline!). Adding any more slices will likely explode >> brains. > > Possibly, but the nested HTML div markup for centred decorations on a > border is a pain to get right too, Really? It's only one level of nesting. Also, if they want truly centered inner borders, I expect they want 5x5 images, not 4x4. I think once you get to that level of syntax complexity you're going to be better off with nested elements. > and you can't rely on polyfills for > print engines that likely don't have JavaScript. That's true. Again, I think we need examples from the print community. I don't follow this list completely, but I can't remember any requests for this. Dean
Received on Thursday, 25 July 2013 18:55:51 UTC