- From: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 12:12:48 +0200
- To: Soonbo Han <soonbo.han@lge.com>
- Cc: Hyojin Song <hyojin22.song@lge.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On 06 Jul 2015, at 07:50, Soonbo Han <soonbo.han@lge.com> wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Florian Rivoal [mailto:florian@rivoal.net] >> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 6:18 AM >> To: Hyojin Song >> Cc: www-style >> Subject: Re: [css-round-display] Request for first review the css-round- >> display >> >> 14) I am not sure I understand how "border-boundary: parent" works. Is it >> to be used to fit the border inside the parent element's shape inside? If >> yes, I think you need to explain this better, and explicitly mention >> shape-inside (and probably shape-padding as well). If it means something >> else, could you explain what? I think using the parent's shape-inside is >> useful, so if that's not what your value does, then we should add one more >> value for that. >> > > "border-boundary: parent" is intended that the border of an element is > circumscribed within that of its parent (possibly a round shape). [1] This > is similar to "border-boundary: display", but the border of the element is > bounded by that of its parent not by that of the display. Thank you for the clarification. This is what I expected, and it seems reasonable. > If it uses the parent's shape-inside, it actually does nothing because the > element is already laid inside its parent as in [2]. I think shape-inside is underspecified, and this is causing some ambiguities. As I understand it, the parent's shape-inside property affects the positioning and length of the child element's line boxes, but does not change the shape of the border. It is not clear to me whether it affects the position of the border: in an example like [3], would the border line up with the green line (content edge), the solid blue line (shape-inside), or the dashed blue line (shape-padding)? The dashed blue line in the figure you linked to [2] represents the shape-inside, but I would expect the border in this situation to be the same rectangular shape as usual, and that border-boundary:parent is what we would use to shape the border. I think the shape-inside property needs clarifications, and that these should be done with the possibilities offered by border-boundary in mind. > So I think that > referring to the border of the element's parent is more plausible. It seems to me that shape-inside should have a value that makes the content fit the parent's content edge adjusted to follow the border if it is not a rectangle (either due to border-radius or to border-boundary), and that when that's the case, border-boundary:parent would follow make the border follow that as well. This would effectively do what you described. But when there is a shape inside, it should be taken into account somehow, if shape-inside does not already do that. Regards, Florian Rivoal > [1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-round-display/images/border_c.png > [2] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-shapes-2/images/shape-inside-content.png [3] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-shapes-2/images/rounded-rect-overflow.png
Received on Monday, 6 July 2015 10:13:18 UTC