- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 01:39:31 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 04/11/2014 10:57 PM, Dirk Schulze wrote: > Hi fantasai, > > On Dec 11, 2013, at 6:39 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > >>>> >>>> 8. The use of 'mask source' and 'mask image' in the spec is confusing. >>>> There need to be separate concepts for the mask introduced by the >>>> background-inspired mask properties and by the border-image-inspired >>>> mask properties. Once these concepts are named, defined, and >>>> used consistently, we can have a clearer model for understanding >>>> CSS masking. >>>> >>>> 9. The definition of 'clipping path' in the Terminology section is >>>> more confusing than helpful. Just <dfn> the first instance of >>>> the term in the Clipping Paths section. >>> >>> I’ll do. >> >> #8 is particularly important. I find the spec hard to understand >> because of it. > > mask source does now only apply to the <mask> element. mask image is > used for the actual mask “layer”, so the resulting image that is used > to do the mask operation. I hope this addresses your conveners and I > can close issue 17[1]. This is better, yes. There is a similar problem with the term "mask image" being used for both layer masks and box masks, though. If I click on a property, it talks about how it affects the "mask image", but it's not clear whether it's affecting the mask image specified by mask-box or the one in its corresponding layer. Splitting these two things into two independent terms would help. Maybe "mask layer" / "mask layer image" for the first one and "box mask" / "box mask layer" for the second? (CSS3BG talks about "background images" vs. "border images", so it's clear there.) ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2014 08:40:01 UTC