IRC log of CSS on 2009-07-22

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:41:56 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #CSS
15:41:56 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:42:02 [glazou]
Zakim, this will be Style
15:42:03 [Zakim]
ok, glazou; I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM scheduled to start in 18 minutes
15:51:45 [oyvinds]
oyvinds has joined #css
15:57:44 [Zakim]
Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has now started
15:57:51 [Zakim]
15:58:25 [Zakim]
15:58:39 [ChrisL]
ChrisL has joined #css
16:00:17 [Zakim]
16:00:56 [dbaron]
Zakim, [Mozilla] has David_Baron
16:00:56 [Zakim]
+David_Baron; got it
16:00:58 [glazou]
16:00:58 [Zakim]
16:01:20 [Zakim]
16:01:24 [Zakim]
16:02:31 [ChrisL]
rrsagent, here
16:02:31 [RRSAgent]
16:02:44 [ChrisL]
rrsagent, make logs public
16:03:06 [arronei]
arronei has joined #CSS
16:03:08 [sgalineau]
sgalineau has joined #css
16:03:09 [Zakim]
16:03:11 [sgalineau]
Zakim, [Microsoft] has sylvaing
16:03:11 [Zakim]
+sylvaing; got it
16:03:37 [ChrisL]
16:06:26 [sgalineau]
Zakim, [Microsoft] has arronei
16:06:26 [Zakim]
+arronei; got it
16:06:33 [ChrisL]
zakim, who is here?
16:06:33 [Zakim]
On the phone I see plinss, Brad_Kemper, [Mozilla], glazou, [Microsoft], ChrisL, Bert
16:06:35 [Zakim]
[Microsoft] has arronei
16:06:36 [Zakim]
On IRC I see sgalineau, arronei, ChrisL, oyvinds, RRSAgent, glazou, Zakim, bradk, anne2, krijnh, karl, myakura, dbaron, shepazu, jdaggett, Lachy, fantasai, trackbot, Hixie, Bert,
16:06:38 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] has David_Baron
16:06:39 [Zakim]
... plinss
16:08:25 [Zakim]
16:08:38 [dbaron]
Zakim, ??P7 is fantasai
16:08:38 [Zakim]
+fantasai; got it
16:09:47 [ChrisL]
Scribe: ChrisL
16:09:49 [szilles]
szilles has joined #css
16:10:02 [ChrisL]
Chair: Peter
16:10:18 [dbaron]
hmmm, my internet connection seems to have soured so as to make voip unusable...
16:10:32 [ChrisL]
Meeting: CSS WG telcon
16:10:38 [Zakim]
16:10:55 [glazou]
dbaron: : same thing here, lot of noise
16:11:15 [ChrisL]
zakim, list attendees
16:11:15 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been plinss, Brad_Kemper, David_Baron, glazou, ChrisL, Bert, sylvaing, arronei, fantasai, SteveZ
16:11:26 [ChrisL]
Topic: CSS3 Background
16:12:38 [Zakim]
16:12:47 [ChrisL]
CL: I sent in a proposal
16:13:09 [Zakim]
16:15:51 [dbaron]
I think we should post this proposal to www-style and try to get some feedback.
16:16:02 [ChrisL]
BB: Prefer the 4.2 opaque box solution
16:16:34 [ChrisL]
BK: prefer the one with shaddows all round
16:16:45 [ChrisL]
CL: Thats actually two shadows, one inset
16:17:08 [ChrisL]
DG: Prefer the one with the alpha chanel.
16:17:16 [ChrisL]
... often asked hhow to do that
16:17:43 [ChrisL]
BK: Anyone that can crwate an image can also create a drop shadow
16:18:12 [ChrisL]
DG: I have a counter example, want the user agent to be able to use the alpha channel
16:18:24 [fantasai]
DG: counter-example, making an app and want to add shadows through the app
16:19:16 [fantasai]
DB: Leaning towards not including the shadow, because it may often not be quite right
16:19:36 [dbaron]
DB: I think I might lean towards agreeing with BK, because this feels like the type of feature where we spend a lot of work implementing something that doesn't quite do what authors want, so nobody uses it.
16:19:58 [ChrisL]
DB: Prefer to disable box-shadow
16:20:18 [dbaron]
CL: shadow incoporated into border-image doesn't work with the slicing
16:20:43 [ChrisL]
CL: I have an example not linked in which puts a drop shadow on the source ; the slicing is then wrong
16:21:07 [ChrisL]
DB: yes, can't get that with the author making their own shadow in the source image
16:21:42 [ChrisL]
DG: Shadows not aligned with circles, so slicing will mess up the shadow. Woudl need two images, one for the shadow and one for the image itself
16:21:57 [ChrisL]
SZ: If images distort the shadow distorts differently
16:22:15 [ChrisL]
DG: Web designers want to apply the effects dynamically
16:22:58 [ChrisL]
CL: Could animate the drop shadow. Lighting effect on mouse position for example
16:23:06 [sgalineau]
example of ChrisL's dynamic shadow update based on mouse position with text-shadow: § ACID3
16:23:06 [sgalineau]
§ Evaluate score for current plan
16:23:06 [sgalineau]
§ >ACID3::003-025
16:23:06 [sgalineau]
16:23:09 [sgalineau]
16:23:15 [sgalineau]
16:23:22 [ChrisL]
BK: Agree its powerful, but should be a separate property that works on all images
16:23:45 [ChrisL]
sz: how about renaming the property border-shadow instead of box-shadow
16:24:30 [ChrisL]
EE: everyone is using this property already, so its hard to change even with vendor prefixes
16:25:30 [ChrisL]
DB: people will have to change anyway
16:25:35 [fantasai]
CL: Creating a version of the image with drop-shadow and then slicing and tiling it was really gross
16:26:14 [ChrisL]
EE: In applications the spacing is critical
16:26:24 [fantasai]
ScribeNick: fantasai
16:26:28 [ChrisL]
DB; Pages not useing it due to patchy browser support
16:26:59 [fantasai]
Chris: I had a section in the document that shows the result with a solid box
16:27:24 [fantasai]
Chris: to show that it's the same as with drop-shadow on a solid border
16:27:44 [fantasai]
Brad: Already starting to think about what it currently does with box-shadow
16:27:54 [fantasai]
Brad: It doesn't follow the alpha-image of the actual border
16:27:59 [fantasai]
Brad: not using alpha channels
16:28:18 [fantasai]
CL: alpha-image of a solid rectangle is a solid rectangle
16:28:24 [fantasai]
Brad: But it's not if it's dots or dashes
16:28:35 [fantasai]
Brad: For this image seems like you can't slice it very well
16:28:57 [fantasai]
Brad: But for a lot of things I would use, e.g. for fancy corners on a straight-edged box
16:29:13 [fantasai]
Brad: would be able to use the images for the shadow
16:29:22 [fantasai]
Chris: I think when you actually try it, it won't work
16:29:37 [fantasai]
Peter: I'm sure there are some images where it would look right, but a lot where it wouldn't
16:30:42 [sgalineau]
can someone post the lamp demo page ?
16:31:14 [fantasai]
16:31:26 [fantasai]
Brad: Either way you are going to be restricted
16:31:33 [dbaron]
s/DB; Pages not useing it due to patchy browser support/DB: I think the reason the change would cause more breakage for iPhone (etc.) applications than Web pages is that Web pages aren't using it because not all browsers support it yet
16:31:43 [fantasai]
Brad: E.g. in Chris's example you can't create complex effects
16:32:16 [fantasai]
Brad: Restriction on my way is that you can't animate it and certain types of images where you have a big corner and things narrowing as they come towards the corner.. that would be something you can't do with my way
16:32:44 [fantasai]
Steve: There's nothing that prevents someone from /not/ adding the drop-shadow and putting it in the image
16:32:58 [fantasai]
Brad: But then you can't use drop-shadow as a fallback
16:33:11 [fantasai]
Fantasai: I think that's less important than being able to get these cases right
16:35:30 [ChrisL]
EE: Maybe we could use media queries in the future to detect images being turned off. But the fallback issue sis not enough to block using drop shadows on border images
16:37:11 [fantasai]
EE: We have a large chunk of use cases that can only be achieved by including the shadow in the image, and also a large chunk of use cases that can only be achieved by dynamically applying the border
16:38:38 [fantasai]
Peter: I think box-shadow and border-image are separate things and I don't think they should be combined like this.
16:38:48 [fantasai]
Peter: I think we should have a border-shadow property instead.
16:39:12 [fantasai]
Peter: Put a switch on it to get different behaviors.
16:39:22 [ChrisL]
so then the dashed borders would also behave like this?
16:39:35 [fantasai]
Steve: I like the solution that has border-shadow apply to both regular borders and image borders
16:39:50 [fantasai]
Steve: and box-shadow does what it does now
16:40:08 [dbaron]
Brad: ... where box-shadow is not drawn when there's a border-image.
16:41:01 [fantasai]
Chris: So are we going to move forward with border-shadow now, or reserve that for a future version?
16:41:51 [fantasai]
Chris: Are we adding this now?
16:42:30 [fantasai]
Chris: Just copy the box-shadow property definition and tweak it
16:42:38 [fantasai]
Chris: spread for arbitrary images is not defined
16:42:57 [fantasai]
Brad: We also talked about having switches in the property, might delay CR
16:43:16 [ChrisL]
i'm hapy to add a border-shadow to the spec, and add an example that has a dashed border
16:44:09 [fantasai]
dbaron: We also need to get this discussion on www-style
16:44:25 [fantasai]
fantasai: I want to make sure roc and hyatt agree with whatever we decide to do here
16:44:36 [ChrisL]
sz: update this first to be a border-shadow
16:45:05 [fantasai]
s/this/Chris's proposal document/
16:45:21 [fantasai]
Brad: They can also read the minutes of this meeting, too, right?
16:45:47 [fantasai]
fantasai: Why not put the switch on box-shadow?
16:45:57 [fantasai]
fantasai: You wouldn't use both properties at the same time anyway
16:46:32 [ChrisL]
action: chris to revise the border-image-and-box-shadow proposal to make a border-shadow proposal, them make public
16:46:32 [trackbot]
Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - chris
16:46:32 [trackbot]
Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. ChrisWilson, clilley)
16:46:41 [fantasai]
Steve: In your examples, the shadow didn't look like it was on the box, it looked like it was on the border
16:46:44 [ChrisL]
action: lilley to revise the border-image-and-box-shadow proposal to make a border-shadow proposal, them make public
16:46:44 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-165 - Revise the border-image-and-box-shadow proposal to make a border-shadow proposal, them make public [on Chris Lilley - due 2009-07-29].
16:47:18 [fantasai]
Steve: I would prefer Chris write it up as a separate property and then suggest that it could be merged
16:47:29 [ChrisL]
sz: note at the end that this could be done with a switch on box-shadow
16:48:02 [fantasai]
ACTION: Chris write up border-shadow proposal
16:48:02 [trackbot]
Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Chris
16:48:02 [trackbot]
Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. ChrisWilson, clilley)
16:48:13 [fantasai]
ACTION: clilley write up border-shadow proposal
16:48:13 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-166 - Write up border-shadow proposal [on Chris Lilley - due 2009-07-29].
16:48:46 [ChrisL]
I can revise the proposal and make it public for Friday
16:48:54 [ChrisL]
Topic; flexbox and css3 images
16:48:56 [fantasai]
Topic: Publication status of flexbox and css3-images
16:49:03 [fantasai]
Bert: Will be officially published tomorrow
16:49:05 [ChrisL]
bb: they wil be published tomorrow
16:49:27 [ChrisL]
... fixed a few markup errors, so please do a cvs update before further edits
16:49:29 [fantasai]
Bert: longer answer is, I had to fix markup errors in the drafts, so next time you update do cvs update first
16:50:03 [fantasai]
ScribeNick: ChrisL
16:50:32 [ChrisL]
Topic: Percentage corners
16:50:50 [ChrisL]
EE: Add this or defer? Already added in Mozilla
16:51:03 [ChrisL]
... and they will be removing the vendor prefix soon
16:51:09 [ChrisL]
... prefer to defer it therefore
16:51:28 [ChrisL]
DB: Need to remember to remove it when we drop the border prefix
16:51:39 [ChrisL]
PL: This has been implemented since the 890s*
16:51:52 [ChrisL]
16:52:07 [ChrisL]
DB: Don't reacll seeing actual uses of it
16:52:22 [ChrisL]
BK; Does the prefix form continue to be supported?
16:52:29 [ChrisL]
DB: probably not
16:52:57 [ChrisL]
PL: Whats the problem with having percentage values in there?
16:52:59 [fantasai]
s/therefore/as we decided earlier, but wondering if it's possible for Mozilla to remove at this point or if we have to define this so it doesn't conflict later on/
16:53:24 [ChrisL]
EE: There are two differing interpretations of what a percentage means
16:53:37 [ChrisL]
BK: Suggested on www-style how to handle them
16:53:50 [ChrisL]
... one is based on width, two is based on the relevant side
16:54:07 [ChrisL]
DB; Agree with Hakon and say they are always based on width or height
16:54:22 [ChrisL]
... if you want a particular shape you will use particular units
16:55:03 [ChrisL]
BK: How do you get ovals?
16:55:47 [ChrisL]
DB; One alsways based on width the other based on height
16:55:56 [fantasai]
s/one/one radius/
16:56:05 [ChrisL]
SZ: So its based on the border thickness?
16:56:11 [ChrisL]
DB: No the size of the box
16:56:24 [dbaron]
so you'd get a circle with border-radius: 50%
16:56:27 [dbaron]
or an ellipse
16:56:31 [dbaron]
depending on the shape of the box
16:56:41 [fantasai]
Brad: If you want quarter-circle corners that are not ellipses, then you don't use percentages
16:56:49 [fantasai]
Brad: 10% height is different from 10% width
16:56:51 [ChrisL]
BK: So if you want quarter circle corners, you just can't use percentages?
16:57:05 [fantasai]
Peter: The only thing you couldn't get that way is a percentage-based curve that is always circular
16:57:52 [ChrisL]
PL: If there is only one dimension specified, make it the width. Then you can get both behaviours
16:58:02 [ChrisL]
... always get a circular border
16:58:07 [fantasai]
Peter: I kinda like Brad's idea that the percentage is always based on the width if you only specify one percentage
16:59:01 [ChrisL]
EE: Normally if there are two values and you can drip them, its duplicated, but does not give different behaviour
16:59:12 [ChrisL]
... so its not like other shorthands
16:59:17 [fantasai]
s/drip them/drop one/
16:59:33 [ChrisL]
SZ; Its duplicating the computed value, not the specified one
16:59:58 [fantasai]
Peter: Another way to get that would be to have a width unit. 0.5width
17:00:01 [ChrisL]
PL; Or make new units like a width unit. ).5W
17:00:09 [ChrisL]
17:00:38 [ChrisL]
... width 50% is the same as 0.5W
17:00:51 [ChrisL]
... could be introduced down the road
17:01:16 [ChrisL]
EE; opera also has percentages implemented
17:01:42 [ChrisL]
BB; Any other case where you want percentages, apart from elliptical boxes?
17:01:52 [ChrisL]
17:01:54 [anne2]
(if this is about borders, we might have removed those due to compat issues)
17:01:59 [Zakim]
17:02:02 [anne2]
(supporting percentages there, that is)
17:02:16 [fantasai]
anne2, yes, this is about borders
17:02:17 [anne2]
(sites were using it expecting it not to work)
17:02:21 [sgalineau]
i believe i've seen border-radius used to make a circle
17:02:25 [ChrisL]
PL; Mac buttons with rounded ends irrespective of button length
17:02:31 [fantasai]
anne2, huh?
17:03:01 [anne2]
fantasai, what is unclear?
17:03:20 [fantasai]
Bert gives an example of resizing his window so the box resizes, and that causes the padding to not be enough and text overlaps the border
17:03:26 [fantasai]
17:03:48 [ChrisL]
SZ; If I make the corner a constant size and make the box bigger the corner becomes more square. Don't want that
17:04:07 [fantasai]
anne2, why they would want to use it expecting it not to work
17:04:11 [ChrisL]
17:04:35 [ChrisL]
EE; Anne says percent border radius might have been removed from Opera
17:04:43 [ChrisL]
SZ; not been in a released build anyway
17:04:55 [ChrisL]
17:05:16 [ChrisL]
SZ: Like Brad and Peter's suggestion with the single value
17:05:54 [anne2]
fantasai, dunno, the Web is a fun place
17:06:00 [anne2]
fantasai, you should know, you've done QA :)
17:06:23 [ChrisL]
PL: Not hearing consensus, out of time
17:06:25 [sgalineau]
fantasai, i don't expect the browser i use to work :)
17:06:26 [anne2]
fantasai, I guess they were just trying something, didn't work in IE, but didn't remove it
17:06:27 [ChrisL]
17:06:31 [Zakim]
17:06:33 [ChrisL]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:06:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ChrisL
17:06:34 [Zakim]
17:06:35 [Zakim]
17:06:38 [Zakim]
17:06:39 [Zakim]
17:06:42 [Zakim]
17:06:45 [Zakim]
17:07:07 [fantasai]
dbaron, what do you think of the # of values solution?
17:07:25 [dbaron]
fantasai, I think it's ugly but I can live with it.
17:11:46 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, [Microsoft], in Style_CSS FP()12:00PM
17:11:49 [Zakim]
Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has ended
17:11:50 [Zakim]
Attendees were plinss, Brad_Kemper, David_Baron, glazou, ChrisL, Bert, sylvaing, arronei, fantasai, SteveZ
17:14:59 [sylvaing]
sylvaing has joined #css
17:32:39 [dsinger]
dsinger has joined #css
17:41:57 [anne2]
anne2 has joined #css
18:12:51 [dsinger]
dsinger has joined #css
18:17:50 [dsinger]
dsinger has joined #css
19:11:18 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #CSS
19:12:18 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #css
19:39:44 [dsinger]
dsinger has joined #css
20:32:37 [hyatt]
hyatt has joined #css
20:32:49 [hyatt]
dbaron: yt?
20:32:54 [dbaron]
hyatt, yep
20:33:05 [hyatt]
dbaron: do you know any reason why background-clip doesn't support content-box?
20:33:12 [hyatt]
our implementation in webkit does
20:33:30 [hyatt]
it's not clear to me why content-box is not in the list at
20:33:38 [dbaron]
I think it was just because nobody thought of a use case
20:33:56 [hyatt]
just seems kind of odd when you compare with background-origin
20:33:57 [dbaron]
I don't think there would be opposition to putting it back if you feel strongly, though.
20:34:07 [hyatt]
fantasai: ping
20:34:09 [dbaron]
It does seem a little odd, and it makes handling the shorthand a little odd too.
20:34:17 [dbaron]
But I'm sort of ok with either way.
20:34:21 [hyatt]
i'd like it put back in
20:34:28 [hyatt]
just simplifies things imo
20:34:33 [hyatt]
if the parsing of those two properties is the same
20:41:30 [fantasai]
hyatt: pong
20:42:13 [fantasai]
hyatt: We left it out because you almost never want to clip to the content-box
20:42:15 [hyatt]
fantasai: pretty please on putting content-box back in to background-clip? :)
20:42:39 [fantasai]
hyatt: makes the shorthand a mess if you have to explicitly undo background-clip: content-box when you want to set the origin
20:43:14 [fantasai]
hyatt: give me a really convincing reason and I'll consider reopening the issue, but we've discussed it a few times already
20:43:21 [hyatt]
eh i don't care that much
20:43:24 [hyatt]
mostly concerned about breakage
20:43:32 [hyatt]
since we support this now
20:43:39 [fantasai]
hyatt: what would you use it for?
20:43:52 [hyatt]
no idea, just had it for completeness
20:43:59 [fantasai]
hyatt: content-box clipping is almost always too close to the content, you pretty much always want some padding around the content
20:44:07 [hyatt]
we just matched origin and clip
20:44:08 [fantasai]
hyatt: I'd expect less than 1% usage
20:44:29 [hyatt]
yeah the scary part is as i update our syntax i have to make the background shorthand obey the finalized versions
20:44:33 [hyatt]
that's what i'm most scared of
20:44:47 [hyatt]
the background-clip property itself i'm not worried about
20:44:52 [hyatt]
since dropping the prefix lets me change that
20:44:57 [hyatt]
but the shorthand is scary
20:45:03 [fantasai]
20:45:15 [fantasai]
I wouldn't worry too much about breakage for background-clip: content-box
20:45:35 [fantasai]
I can't think of a single reason why you'd want to use it, and nobody's come up with one whenever we've discussed it
20:45:39 [fantasai]
20:46:14 [hyatt]
ok i'll just add separate parsing paths for both
20:46:35 [fantasai]
iirc the shorthand only takes one -box value
20:46:55 [fantasai]
20:47:10 [hyatt]
oh you can't specify clip in the shorthand any more!
20:47:14 [hyatt]
20:47:19 [hyatt]
i didn't notice that
20:48:30 [hyatt]
i don't understand that change?
20:48:43 [hyatt]
why would clip not be in the shorthand if it can apply in every layer of multiple bgs
20:49:29 [hyatt]
oh.If ‘background-origin’ is present and its value matches a possible value for ‘background-clip’ then it also sets ‘background-clip’ to that value
20:49:34 [hyatt]
i see.
20:49:38 [hyatt]
20:50:15 [hyatt]
fantasai: so the shorthand parsing would certainly be simplified if background-clip could take content-box
20:50:31 [hyatt]
then you don't have the oddity of being unable to set background-clip from the shorthand when background-origin is content-box
20:53:13 [fantasai]
if we made background: content-box; set background-clip: content-box as well as background-origin: content-box, nobody would ever use it
20:53:41 [fantasai]
you might want to position your image wrt the content box, but you almost never want to clip it to that box
20:54:19 [hyatt]
i'm approaching this more from a parsing perspective without caring about use cases
20:54:28 [hyatt]
just from a pure syntax perspective it's odd to me that a property can't be set
20:54:34 [hyatt]
in the shorthand
20:54:54 [fantasai]
there's so much stuff in the shorthand already
20:54:56 [sgalineau]
sgalineau has joined #css
20:55:20 [hyatt]
more special case parsing code it is then
20:55:22 [hyatt]
20:55:27 [fantasai]
This is one less thing to remember. You usually want the origin and cliprect to match anyway (except when it's content-box)
21:13:51 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #css
21:38:27 [hyatt]
fantasai: if background-attachment is not local
21:38:42 [hyatt]
fantasai: i assume background-origin of padding-box just uses a fictional padding box that doesnt care about scrolling
21:39:00 [hyatt]
term padding-box is kind of funny in that case heh
21:40:00 [fantasai]
background-attachment not local is the 2.1 case
21:40:11 [hyatt]
21:40:13 [fantasai]
why do we need a fictional padding box?
21:40:23 [hyatt]
asking how that interacts with background-clip/origin of padding-box
21:40:35 [hyatt]
well let's say you have an overflow:auto div
21:40:38 [hyatt]
and the border box is 300x300
21:40:41 [hyatt]
but the padding box scrolls
21:40:44 [hyatt]
so it is 1000x1000
21:41:13 [fantasai]
then the background is attached to the viewport
21:41:17 [fantasai]
so it doesn't scroll
21:41:20 [fantasai]
in the !local case
21:41:29 [fantasai]
it's just fixed to the border, as it were
21:41:31 [hyatt]
yes, but what does that mean when used with clip/origin of padding/content
21:41:50 [fantasai]
well the viewport is inside the paddng box
21:41:58 [fantasai]
so padding-box is not an issue
21:42:03 [fantasai]
origin content-box might be
21:42:19 [fantasai]
21:42:24 [hyatt]
ok it's obvious you don't really use the padding-box in 2.1
21:42:31 [hyatt]
it's just a synthetic padding-box
21:42:32 [hyatt]
inside the border
21:42:38 [hyatt]
totally ignoring the scrolling
21:42:43 [hyatt]
which is fine but not really spelled out
21:43:02 [fantasai]
ok, yeah, so you have two conceptual padding boxes
21:43:05 [fantasai]
the one inside the viewport
21:43:10 [fantasai]
and the one outside the viewport
21:43:15 [fantasai]
they coincide when there's no scrolling
21:43:18 [hyatt]
21:43:37 [fantasai]
it makes sense here to use the outer padding-box when you're attached to the border
21:43:45 [fantasai]
and the inner padding box when you're attached to the content (i.e. local)
21:43:52 [hyatt]
21:44:02 [hyatt]
i think the spec should probably clarify this
21:44:12 [hyatt]
content-box has the same issue
21:44:14 [fantasai]
21:44:15 [fantasai]
21:44:17 [hyatt]
two conceptual content boxes
21:44:19 [fantasai]
border-box has the opposite issue
21:44:28 [hyatt]
right which you addressed by stating you could just clip
21:44:28 [fantasai]
and the spec says what to do there
21:45:16 [fantasai]
yeah, I guess you have to create a conceptual content box that's fixed to the border-box
21:45:22 [fantasai]
and position wrt that
21:45:35 [fantasai]
good catch
21:45:39 [fantasai]
I'll add some text for it
22:01:03 [hyatt]
ok background-clip, background-origin in webkit now with prefixes dropped and final syntax
22:01:05 [hyatt]
22:01:52 [hyatt]
fantasai: pedantic nitpick
22:01:53 [hyatt]
"The difference between ‘scroll’ and ‘local’ is only visible when the element has a scrolling mechanism: "
22:02:03 [hyatt]
technically you can set the scrollLeft/Top of overflow:hidden element
22:02:05 [hyatt]
22:02:17 [hyatt]
there is no visible scrolling mechanism necessarily in that case
22:02:25 [hyatt]
but probably not worth bothering with correcting i guess
22:03:29 [hyatt]
actually maybe it is worth correcting
22:03:43 [hyatt]
since basically overflow:hidden + background-attachment:local will need to clip to padding box
22:04:44 [hyatt]
it's kind of weird that if the contents of the element don't scroll that you might not clip
22:04:53 [hyatt]
but then if you suddenly do scroll that you'd suddenly start clipping
22:05:00 [hyatt]
i'm thinking of overflow:auto
22:05:12 [hyatt]
"The UA may, however, treat the ‘border-box’ value of ‘background-clip’ as ‘padding-box’ in cases where ‘background-attachment’ is ‘local’ and the contents of the element scroll."
22:05:33 [hyatt]
seems like even if the contents of the element don't scroll you may just want to always use padding-box
22:05:45 [hyatt]
since otherwise as scrollbars come and go your backgroudn would jump in and out of the border
22:06:20 [fantasai]
hmm, ok
22:06:49 [fantasai]
I have to go run some errands, I'll be back later. I'll read the scrollback, though, so you can keep leaving comments :)
22:06:56 [hyatt]
22:07:03 [fantasai]
thanks for the comments though!
22:07:03 [hyatt]
i think i'd just say if overflow != visible
22:07:10 [hyatt]
that border-box becomes padding-box
22:07:16 [fantasai]
22:07:17 [hyatt]
when background attachment is local
22:17:21 [anne2]
anne2 has joined #css
22:17:32 [hyatt]
box-shadow inset confuses me
22:17:42 [hyatt]
the examples in the draft show the shadow drawing over the background
22:17:47 [hyatt]
but how can that be
22:17:56 [hyatt]
shadows draw behind borders and backgrounds...
22:18:04 [hyatt]
is the stacking order flipped for inset shadows?
22:18:10 [hyatt]
if so, where does it say that
22:18:42 [hyatt]
ah nvm i see it
22:18:43 [hyatt]
"and the inner shadows of an element are drawn immediately above the background of that element (below the borders and border image, if any)."