W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > January 2014

Re: fill and stroke properties with CSS <image> values

From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 16:36:37 +0000
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Erik Dahlström <ed@opera.com>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>, public-fx <public-fx@w3.org>
Message-ID: <022C1151-CD42-451C-B2B5-C476F553B111@adobe.com>

On Jan 22, 2014, at 4:34 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 2:55 AM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote:
>> I actually hope that we can follow CSS Masking (but with layers) here. That means that <the rest> would magically disappear. And the paint server is just a <image> but with url(). ICC Colors should be part of CSS4 Colors already or will be once the editors added the changes.
> Yeah, it's not currently, but I can do that.  I really don't like the
> way SVG does ICC colors, but they should be fine from a grammatical
> standpoint, I think.
>> The main difference to background (and I am very sad about that): <color> can not be painted when we have a valid paint server reference. But it can still be treated as for background for all other cases (means it is a separate solid color filled layer).
> You can wrap a color in image() to transform it into an <image> value.

I just wanted to point out that:

background: url(“image.png”) red;

 means something different than:

fill: url(“image.png”) red;

In the first example the color is drawn, in the second it is just a fallback.

This is unfortunate but can not be changed.


> ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 22 January 2014 16:37:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:54:50 UTC