W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2014

Re: [css4-image] element() comments

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 09:11:28 +1300
Message-ID: <CAOp6jLYtC_+VDh7KMo25yERb3-nscEzLmPLMQPODmRi+N5DnJA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style <www-style@w3.org>, Nicholas Cameron <ncameron@mozilla.com>
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 6:34 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
> wrote:
> > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-images/#element-notation
> >>
> >> The function represents an image with its intrinsic size equal to the
> >> decorated bounding box of the referenced element
> >
> >
> > Giving element() an intrinsic size is actually super bad. It creates
> almost
> > arbitrarily bad circular layout dependencies; e.g. any <li> element's
> size
> > can now depend on the size of any other element in the document!
> Detecting
> > and fixing the circularity isn't easy either, because you can combine
> this
> > with existing dependencies to create cycles in all kinds of ways. Since
> this
> > is mostly useless anyway, I propose specifying that element()s have no
> > intrinsic dimensions at all.
> Unless I'm misunderstanding, the spec is describing Mozilla's current
> behavior.  This is illustrated by the first example in
> <https://hacks.mozilla.org/2010/08/mozelement/> (the one with white
> text on an orange background), and a few others in that page.

Good point. Our implementation doesn't support list-style-image:element()
yet, and so element() intrinsic size currently can't affect layout in
Gecko. But we're adding that now and hitting this problem. So either we add
a parameter to the object-sizing algorithm to distinguish between the cases
where object sizing can affect layout and those where it can't, or we
change our behavior. I prefer the latter since object sizing is already too
complex for my taste.

Jtehsauts  tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy  Mdaon  yhoaus  eanuttehrotraiitny  eovni
le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o  Whhei csha iids  teoa
stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d  'mYaonu,r  "sGients  uapr,e  tfaokreg iyvoeunr,
'm aotr  atnod  sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t"  uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n?  gBoutt  uIp
waanndt  wyeonut  thoo mken.o w
Received on Monday, 3 February 2014 20:12:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:51:17 UTC