- From: Soonbo Han <soonbo.han@lge.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:00:27 +0900
- To: "'Alan Stearns'" <stearns@adobe.com>, "'Florian Rivoal'" <florian@rivoal.net>
- Cc: "'Hyojin Song'" <hyojin22.song@lge.com>, "'www-style'" <www-style@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: Alan Stearns [mailto:stearns@adobe.com] > Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 7:20 AM > To: Florian Rivoal; Soonbo Han > Cc: Hyojin Song; www-style > Subject: Re: [css-round-display] Request for first review the css-round- > display > > On 7/6/15, 3:12 AM, "Florian Rivoal" <florian@rivoal.net> wrote: > > >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. > > I agree. > > > > >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. > > As originally conceived, shape-inside does nothing to the border. The blue > lines in figures 1 and 2 are merely showing the layout constraints added > by shape-inside and shape-padding. I think changing the shape of the > border should be limited to border-* properties. > Then, what do you think about adding a new value (e.g., 'shape') to the border-boundary property to draw the border of an element according to the value of its shape-inside property? > > > >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. > > The content-box value (described in shapes level 1) is the value you’re > looking for. This constrains the content area to the inner edge of the > border, however it’s shaped. > Okay, I think that the content-box value is the one we're looking for. Thanks! > > > >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 Friday, 17 July 2015 01:01:12 UTC