Re: [css-masking] Ic issue 17: mask source and mask image

On Apr 23, 2014, at 10:39 AM, fantasai <> wrote:

> On 04/11/2014 10:57 PM, Dirk Schulze wrote:
>> Hi fantasai,
>> On Dec 11, 2013, at 6:39 PM, fantasai <> 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.)

I use the terms “mask layer image” and “mask box image”. The section “Mask processing”[1] applies to both, mask layer image and mask box image. It is marked explicitly in the first sentence of the section.

Is that ok?



> ~fantasai

Received on Tuesday, 29 April 2014 18:23:29 UTC