Re: [css-shapes] new Last Call Working Draft published

On 3/5/14, 7:29 AM, "Håkon Wium Lie" <> wrote:

>Alan Stearns wrote:
> > The CSS WG has published a Last Call Working Draft of the CSS Shapes
> > Module Level 1:
> > 
> >

>The draft, as it stands, has issues.
>First, by describing the shape of an element in the style sheet,
>content and presentation is mixed. If images had been referred to in
>the style sheet (like background images are), this would probably have
>been ok, but when the elements are HTML elements, CSS should not
>describe their shapes.

I don’t quite understand this. CSS describes the displayed shape of
elements using tools like border-radius. One use case of shape-outside is
to use that same shape from CSS to affect wrapping behavior. The basic
shape functions give CSS more expressivity on how an element is rendered
(with clip-path) and how wrapping occurs. These capabilities seem to me to
be properly placed in CSS.

>Second, the draft uses dummy DIV elements to achive presentational
>effects. This problem is discussed at some length here:

There is a single example that uses divs, and for the purposes of the
example I don’t see a problem with the markup. But I could change the
content to use <p> and the floats to use ::before and ::after, if you like.

>Third, there is a way to refer to a shape in the image itself, as
>opposed to writing poloygons in CSS. That's good. However, only the
>alpha channel of the image can be used. I believe it is much more
>natural for authors to use the visible luminance of the image, and
>this option should be added. The current model favors authoring tools.

We’ve discussed this before, and luminance could be added in a future
level, along with additional shape mechanisms currently described in the
shapes level 2 skeleton draft. I would prefer to keep level 1 as small as
possible so that we can implement and iterate.



Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2014 16:15:36 UTC