W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2015

Re: [css-ui-3][css-backgrounds-3][css-box][css-shape][css-round-display] Is the border box rounded by border-radius?

From: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 20:25:27 +0200
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <CB4E9F19-2EA9-4527-90EA-CD3ED51A0CC7@rivoal.net>
To: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>

> On 16 Jun 2015, at 17:39, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> wrote:
> 
> On 6/16/15, 8:30 AM, "Florian Rivoal" <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:
> 
>> I was writing tests for css-ui-3, and ran into an ambiguity.
>> 
>> About the cursor property, css-ui says this:
>> 
>> "This property specifies the type of cursor to be
>>  displayed for the pointing device when within the
>>  element’s border-box."
> 
> Perhaps it should say something like “when within the area clipped by the
> element’s border edge” and use this definition:
> 
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-backgrounds/#corner-clipping

Right. If "border box" isn't rounded, as various parts of various specs seem to assume without spelling it out, then adding a sentence and pointing to this section looks like the right thing to do.

Maybe I should add a note anyway. Even if border-box is or will be defined to do the right thing, this seems hard enough to track down that it might be worth spelling out explicitly.

But we probably need to establish a term (border shape? shaped border box?) that means "the not necessarily rectangular shape that follows the edge of the actual border, whatever it's shape, excluding border-image-offset". And while we're at it, tweak the phrasing to make sure that it still makes sense if the box is fragmented. css-box, if it was stable, would probably be a decent home for this, but since it's not backgrounds and borders is probably alright.

Then once we have that term, both 'border-radius' and css-round-display's 'border-boundary' should clarify that they do affect that shape (and any other similar property, if I'm missing one), and css-shapes should probably refer to it rather than repeatedly paraphrase it.

 - Florian
Received on Tuesday, 16 June 2015 18:25:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:54 UTC