Re: [css-shapes] Purpose of fill-rule not specified

Okay, that makes sense, although I think you need a note to be clear that
the shape used in shape-outside is calculated *as if nonzero was specified*,
otherwise it starts to look inconsistent when you consider the effect of
infinitely thin spurs. (See this demo
<http://codepen.io/karaken12/pen/bdmbwg?editors=110> to see what I mean.)

Was there any particular reason for choosing this behaviour, by the way? As
I mentioned, it wasn't what I expected on reading the spec, but I can't
find any discussion as to why it works this way.

Cheers,
Tom

On 22 July 2015 at 20:58, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> wrote:

> On 7/22/15, 7:08 AM, "Tom Potts" <karaken12@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I've updated the
> >example <http://codepen.io/karaken12/pen/gpdwKO?editors=110> to actually
> >use the shape specification and show the browser's behaviour. On Windows
> >7 Chrome (v43.0.2357.134) it doesn't do what I would expect it to: it
> >basically ignores the fill-rule setting.
>
> That’s intended. The polygon in Case 3 has an internal void, but the
> contours still include all of the right edge. Fill-rule doesn’t have any
> effect on shape-outside. It’s included for shape-inside and clip-path,
> where internal voids are relevant. I could add a note to the draft
> mentioning this.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alan
>
> >
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Tom
> >
> >
> >On 21 July 2015 at 12:00, Tom Potts <karaken12@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >Reading the spec I couldn't see what the consequence of specifying a
> >fill-rule would be. For example, what is the expected behaviour of a
> >left-float with a declaration of
> >
> >shape-outside: polygon(0px 150px,100px 150px,100px 50px,50px 50px,50px
> >100px,100px 100px,100px 0px,0px 0px);
> >
> >
> >
> >with fill-rules of nonzero or evenodd? (See SVG of this here:
> >http://codepen.io/karaken12/pen/gpdwKO?editors=100
> ><http://codepen.io/karaken12/pen/gpdwKO?editors=100>)
> >
> >
> >I would expect Case 3 to behave the same as Case 1, but I don't think
> >this is specified. If I've misunderstood and this is already defined then
> >perhaps it could be called out as an example?
> >
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Tom
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>