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

Re: Resolutions regarding fragments

From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 11:01:24 +0000
Message-ID: <52F36B84.3080308@exyr.org>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Pavel Curtis <pavelc@microsoft.com>
CC: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On 06/02/2014 02:36, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> [please don't top-post http://wiki.csswg.org/tools/www-style]
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 6:31 PM, Pavel Curtis <pavelc@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> Did the WG consider using the terms 'content rectangle', 'padding rectangle', etc. for the problematic foursome?
> It was suggested, but we didn't spend much time on thinking up names,
> so no suggestion was seriously considered.
> "* rectangle" might be a decent answer, except that it's not actually
> a rectangle when border-radius/Shapes are in effect.

Well, it depends. For something like the background *painting* area, 
yes. But for the background *positioning* area, we really want a rectangle.

That said, I think we can deal with that ambiguity without having 
separate terms.

Simon Sapin
Received on Thursday, 6 February 2014 11:01:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:18 UTC