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

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

From: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2015 12:34:44 +0200
Cc: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <9BF35F23-BCFD-43FD-BD72-B73F6B8645A9@rivoal.net>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>

> On 17 Jun 2015, at 17:48, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> 
> On 06/16/2015 02:25 PM, Florian Rivoal wrote:
>> 
>>> 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.
> 
> I think you should just use the term "border edge", which is what border-radius
> effectively redefines.
> 
> "Border box" sounds rectangular, and therefore should probably remain rectangular.

css-background is indeed explicit that the border edge is affected by border-radius, so this seems to be the right term to use and I've updated css-ui accordingly.

However, the term is only actually defined in css21, which doesn't talk about border-radius (plus, bikeshed doesn't know about it for auto-linking). So it might be nice to add a new definition, exported and known to bikeshed, that is explicit about this.

 - Florian
Received on Saturday, 20 June 2015 10:35:15 UTC

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