W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2017

Re: [css-backgrounds] border-position

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 06:10:27 -0700
Cc: Benjamin De Cock <ben@stripe.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <18D3283F-BAC1-4944-A5AA-4A2EBAB942FD@gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>

> On Oct 16, 2017, at 6:42 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
>> On 10/13/2017 03:54 AM, Benjamin De Cock wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:13 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com <mailto:brad.kemper@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>    Yeah, the border box is always going to be outside the padding box, and ¡®box-sizing¡¯ will combine with things like ¡®width¡¯
>>    (or ¡®max-width¡¯, ¡®flex-basis¡¯, etc.) to determine the dimensions of the border box, which then leads to how much space is
>>    used for layout.
>>    However, it would be possible to have something like ¡®border-image-offset¡¯ to shift the ink of the line without changing
>>    layout. I could see ¡®border-offset¡¯ being similar to that, but shifting the border ink (as determined by border-style and
>>    border-width) instead of an image. Because it could cause overlapping with existing content, you¡¯d have to be careful with
>>    margin and padding, and it probably wouldn¡¯t be your default way of designing layouts. But I could see that being very
>>    useful if we ever get a feature for doing multiple, overlapping borders. Yeah I really like that, and I agree it'd be extremely useful/powerful! Elika: any thoughts on this?
> I'd want to see examples that show why this is a significantly
> better approach than what we currently have, for some substantial
> number of use cases. :)
> The current approach has the benefit that you don't get overlapping
> content (unless you ask for it explicitly with negative margins).
> If we add this feature, we lose that safety.
> Also, adding features always has a cost, so we have to balance the
> benefits of spending that effort here vs elsewhere.
> ~fantasai

Apparently, what we have regarding multiple borders is a note in an editor¡¯s draft saying we are working on them. 


Is there a blog post or something that suggests a syntax and how it would work?

With border-image, authors already have the ability to push borders outside the safety net when they want to knowingly choose to. I think it would be useful to bring that ability to regular borders. The way I envision it, the safety net would still be there for multiple borders that were not shifted in or out. 

But yeah, I will try to post some samples when I get a chance. 
Received on Tuesday, 17 October 2017 13:10:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:08 UTC