- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 11:19:55 -0700
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 1:09 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > Right now we have three properties: > clip-path > clip-rule > clip > > The weird thing is that 'clip' is not a shorthand for the other two. > This is mainly due to the legacy weirdness that 'clip' only applies > to abspos elements. I'm wondering if we can restrict that legacy > weirdness to just the (already weird) rect() notation, and let the > 'clip' property be the shorthand that it looks like it ought to be? As Dirk said, clip-rule is completely unconnected from clip-path. They share a name prefix, and both concern clipping in some way, but are otherwise completely different. 'clip' and 'clip-path' do exactly the same thing. I thought the plan was to just deprecate 'clip' entirely, and just use 'clip-path' for clipping. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 9 October 2013 18:20:43 UTC