- From: Jonathan Kingston <jonathan@jooped.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 20:53:18 +0000
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Received on Monday, 22 June 2015 20:53:57 UTC
"contain" matches the same/similar meaning to background-size which seems to make sense to me. On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 9:28 PM Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 8:06 AM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> > wrote: > > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-ui-4/#issue-dc2ca3bf > > > > Not sure the name user-select:element keeps the selection inside an > element if it started there. It got called this way for historical reasons > (back when the property was also meant to apply to the content of > dropdowns, check boxes, and radio buttons), but it is not a particularly > intuivive name for what it now does. > > > > How about something like "contain" or "inside" instead? > > > > The current state of support for this value is: > > > > * IE supports it since 2012 under the -ms- prefix with the same > semantics as in the spec. > > * Firefox parses it under the -moz- prefix since forever, but hasn't > implemented any behavior (i.e. it does the same as the initial value). > > > > I'm hoping that this is still new enough that auto (de)prefixers haven't > yet locked us into a compatibility trap. > > "contain" works for me, if we have to change it. No strong opinion. > > ~TJ > >
Received on Monday, 22 June 2015 20:53:57 UTC