Re: [css-shapes] inset() vs. inset-rectange()

On 10/18/13 1:00 PM, "Lea Verou" <lea@verou.me> wrote:

>On Oct 17, 2013, at 01:05, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
>
>> I'm in favor of less typing, can we replace 'inset-rectangle' with
>>'inset'?
>> 
>> It's less "I'm making a rectangle" and more of an analog to
>>margin/padding/
>> border-image-outset, so I think it's clear enough on its own...
>> 
>> ~fantasai
>
>FWIW, I find it quite awkward to have two functions for rectangles, just
>to specify different parameters. I think it would be much better to find
>a way to disambiguate rectangle() parameters to enable authors to do both
>with the same function. Perhaps with an inset keyword?

Given that inset() isn't really part of the SVG-compatible set of shape
functions, I'd be OK with moving it to the proposed CSS-compatible shape()
function. So instead of an inset() function with margin-style parameters,
you'd write:

shape( inset <margin-width>{1,4} [ round <border-radius> ]? )

Thanks,

Alan

Received on Friday, 18 October 2013 20:08:11 UTC