W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2013

Re: [css-shapes] Positioning <basic-shapes> summary, v2

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 18:08:57 +0100
Message-ID: <513509026.20131030180857@w3.org>
To: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Hello Alan,

Tuesday, October 29, 2013, 9:50:07 PM, you wrote:

> The remaining issue is that the current draft uses x and y arguments for
> positioning rectangles, circles and ellipses lifted from SVG Basic Shapes.

Which is a good thing.

> Fantasai would rather have these shapes use a <new-position> syntax, which
> would be an improved version of the <position> syntax we use for
> backgrounds and gradients.

> One complication is that percentage values for SVG-style x and y are
> interpreted differently than percentage values in the corresponding
> components of the <new-position> syntax.

That argues for keeping what we have so that people (who are
increasingly familiar with SVG) can build on their knowledge there
rather than having to remember that in CSS, shapes behave sort of
differently sometimes.

> For background, the <basic-shape> syntax is used by both CSS and SVG in
> the clip-path property of CSS Masking that just went to Last Call. This is
> one of the reasons behind my stubbornness about keeping SVG-style syntax.

That is also a compelling argument.

> So my proposal (A) is to stay with the SVG-style syntax in the draft
> today, and have that syntax use SVG interpretation of percentages:

I am strongly in favour of option A.

Best regards,
 Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Wednesday, 30 October 2013 17:09:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:36 UTC