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 http://www.w3.org/2009/07/22-CSS-irc
- 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]
- +plinss
- 15:58:25 [Zakim]
- +Brad_Kemper
- 15:58:39 [ChrisL]
- ChrisL has joined #css
- 16:00:17 [Zakim]
- +[Mozilla]
- 16:00:56 [dbaron]
- Zakim, [Mozilla] has David_Baron
- 16:00:56 [Zakim]
- +David_Baron; got it
- 16:00:58 [glazou]
- ah
- 16:00:58 [Zakim]
- +glazou
- 16:01:20 [Zakim]
- +[Microsoft]
- 16:01:24 [Zakim]
- +ChrisL
- 16:02:31 [ChrisL]
- rrsagent, here
- 16:02:31 [RRSAgent]
- See http://www.w3.org/2009/07/22-CSS-irc#T16-02-31
- 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]
- +Bert
- 16:03:11 [sgalineau]
- Zakim, [Microsoft] has sylvaing
- 16:03:11 [Zakim]
- +sylvaing; got it
- 16:03:37 [ChrisL]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2009JulSep/0025.html
- 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]
- +??P7
- 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]
- +SteveZ
- 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]
- -glazou
- 16:12:47 [ChrisL]
- CL: I sent in a proposal http://www.w3.org/2009/07/B-and-B/border-image-shadow-combine.html
- 16:13:09 [Zakim]
- +glazou
- 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]
- DOMCanvas
- 16:23:09 [sgalineau]
- doh
- 16:23:15 [sgalineau]
- http://www.zachstronaut.com/lab/text-shadow-box/text-shadow-box.html
- 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]
- http://www.bradclicks.com/cssplay/border-image/Thinking_Outside_The_Box.html
- 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]
- s/890/*90/
- 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]
- s/)/0/
- 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]
- s/;/:/g
- 17:01:54 [anne2]
- (if this is about borders, we might have removed those due to compat issues)
- 17:01:59 [Zakim]
- -Brad_Kemper
- 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]
- s/;/:/g
- 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]
- s/;/:/g
- 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]
- adjourned
- 17:06:31 [Zakim]
- -SteveZ
- 17:06:33 [ChrisL]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 17:06:33 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/07/22-CSS-minutes.html ChrisL
- 17:06:34 [Zakim]
- -[Mozilla]
- 17:06:35 [Zakim]
- -Bert
- 17:06:38 [Zakim]
- -plinss
- 17:06:39 [Zakim]
- -glazou
- 17:06:42 [Zakim]
- -fantasai
- 17:06:45 [Zakim]
- -ChrisL
- 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 http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-background/#background-clip
- 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]
- yeah
- 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]
- cool
- 20:47:10 [hyatt]
- oh you can't specify clip in the shorthand any more!
- 20:47:14 [hyatt]
- yikes
- 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]
- tricksy.
- 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]
- heh
- 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]
- right
- 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]
- hm
- 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]
- right
- 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]
- right
- 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]
- ok
- 21:44:15 [fantasai]
- yeah
- 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]
- woot
- 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]
- s
- 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]
- k
- 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]
- k
- 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)."