Re: [css-shapes] relative box

On 10/01/2013 05:08 PM, Alan Stearns wrote:
> On 9/30/13 11:57 PM, "fantasai" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
>
>> 2.2. Basic Shapes
>>
>>    # When using this syntax to define shapes, the relevant
>>    # box is determined by the computed value of the
>>    # Œbox-sizing¹ property.
>>
>> I'm not sure that this makes a whole lot of sense, given
>> that by default floats use the margin box as their float
>> area, and by default box-sizing is 'content-box'.
>>
>> I don't have a solution in mind, I just think this is wrong.
>> I think rectangle(0,0,100%,100%) should be equivalent to the
>> default behavior; that it's not, strikes me as inconsistent.
>
> My first inclination was also to have that rectangle be equivalent to the
> default behavior, but there is value in being able to select different box
> coordinates (particularly for using the same shape on elements with
> varying borders). We got several requests to be able to choose the
> relevant box, and exactly no requests to be able to simulate the default
> behavior with a basic shape. I think setting 'shape-outside:auto' is
> sufficient for the default behavior.

It's not that we need a use case for getting the default behavior
with an explicit <shape>, it's that, if I want to tweak the shape
starting from the default behavior, having wrapped text jump
suddenly to the content-box as soon as I try to modify the rectangle
is not helpful.

This system also makes it much harder to get the behavior of
sizing against the margin box. The box-sizing property does not
have a margin-box value, and with good reason: people almost
never want to size a box by specifying its margin-box size. But
they might want to inset from the edges of that margin box for
shapes--even if box-sizing is set to border-box. The current
system requires them to calculate margins (and likely also
borders and padding) into the <shape> coordinates.

I understand the desire to select different box coordinates,
but perhaps it makes more sense to have an independent switch.

~fantasai

Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2013 02:30:31 UTC