CSS WG telcon -- 22 Jul 2009

<glazou> ah

<scribe> Scribe: ChrisL

<dbaron> hmmm, my internet connection seems to have soured so as to make voip unusable...

<glazou> dbaron: : same thing here, lot of noise

CSS3 Background

CL: I sent in a proposal http://www.w3.org/2009/07/B-and-B/border-image-shadow-combine.html

<dbaron> I think we should post this proposal to www-style and try to get some feedback.

BB: Prefer the 4.2 opaque box solution

BK: prefer the one with shaddows all round

CL: Thats actually two shadows, one inset

DG: Prefer the one with the alpha chanel.
... often asked hhow to do that

BK: Anyone that can crwate an image can also create a drop shadow

DG: I have a counter example, want the user agent to be able to use the alpha channel

<fantasai> DG: counter-example, making an app and want to add shadows through the app

<fantasai> DB: Leaning towards not including the shadow, because it may often not be quite right

<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.

DB: Prefer to disable box-shadow

<dbaron> CL: shadow incoporated into border-image doesn't work with the slicing

CL: I have an example not linked in which puts a drop shadow on the source : the slicing is then wrong

DB: yes, can't get that with the author making their own shadow in the source image

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

SZ: If images distort the shadow distorts differently

DG: Web designers want to apply the effects dynamically

CL: Could animate the drop shadow. Lighting effect on mouse position for example

<sgalineau> example of ChrisL's dynamic shadow update based on mouse position with text-shadow: � ACID3

<sgalineau> � Evaluate score for current plan

<sgalineau> � >ACID3::003-025

<sgalineau> DOMCanvas

<sgalineau> doh

<sgalineau> http://www.zachstronaut.com/lab/text-shadow-box/text-shadow-box.html

BK: Agree its powerful, but should be a separate property that works on all images

sz: how about renaming the property border-shadow instead of box-shadow

EE: everyone is using this property already, so its hard to change even with vendor prefixes

DB: people will have to change anyway

<fantasai> CL: Creating a version of the image with drop-shadow and then slicing and tiling it was really gross

EE: In applications the spacing is critical

<fantasai> ScribeNick: fantasai

<ChrisL> 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

Chris: I had a section in the document that shows the result with a solid box
... to show that it's the same as with drop-shadow on a solid border

Brad: Already starting to think about what it currently does with box-shadow
... It doesn't follow the alpha-image of the actual border
... not using alpha channels

CL: alpha-image of a solid rectangle is a solid rectangle

Brad: But it's not if it's dots or dashes
... For this image seems like you can't slice it very well
... But for a lot of things I would use, e.g. for fancy corners on a straight-edged box
... would be able to use the images for the shadow

Chris: I think when you actually try it, it won't work

Peter: I'm sure there are some images where it would look right, but a lot where it wouldn't

<sgalineau> can someone post the lamp demo page ?

http://www.bradclicks.com/cssplay/border-image/Thinking_Outside_The_Box.html

Brad: Either way you are going to be restricted
... E.g. in Chris's example you can't create complex effects
... 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

Steve: There's nothing that prevents someone from /not/ adding the drop-shadow and putting it in the image

Brad: But then you can't use drop-shadow as a fallback

Fantasai: I think that's less important than being able to get these cases right

<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

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

Peter: I think box-shadow and border-image are separate things and I don't think they should be combined like this.
... I think we should have a border-shadow property instead.
... Put a switch on it to get different behaviors.

<ChrisL> so then the dashed borders would also behave like this?

Steve: I like the solution that has border-shadow apply to both regular borders and image borders
... and box-shadow does what it does now

<dbaron> Brad: ... where box-shadow is not drawn when there's a border-image.

Chris: So are we going to move forward with border-shadow now, or reserve that for a future version?
... Are we adding this now?
... Just copy the box-shadow property definition and tweak it
... spread for arbitrary images is not defined

Brad: We also talked about having switches in the property, might delay CR

<ChrisL> i'm hapy to add a border-shadow to the spec, and add an example that has a dashed border

dbaron: We also need to get this discussion on www-style

fantasai: I want to make sure roc and hyatt agree with whatever we decide to do here

<ChrisL> sz: update Chris's proposal document first to be a border-shadow

Brad: They can also read the minutes of this meeting, too, right?

fantasai: Why not put the switch on box-shadow?
... You wouldn't use both properties at the same time anyway

<ChrisL> ACTION: chris to revise the border-image-and-box-shadow proposal to make a border-shadow proposal, them make public [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/07/22-CSS-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - chris

<trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. ChrisWilson, clilley)

Steve: In your examples, the shadow didn't look like it was on the box, it looked like it was on the border

<ChrisL> ACTION: lilley to revise the border-image-and-box-shadow proposal to make a border-shadow proposal, them make public [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/07/22-CSS-minutes.html#action02]

<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].

Steve: I would prefer Chris write it up as a separate property and then suggest that it could be merged

<ChrisL> sz: note at the end that this could be done with a switch on box-shadow

<scribe> ACTION: Chris write up border-shadow proposal [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/07/22-CSS-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Chris

<trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. ChrisWilson, clilley)

<scribe> ACTION: clilley write up border-shadow proposal [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/07/22-CSS-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-166 - Write up border-shadow proposal [on Chris Lilley - due 2009-07-29].

<ChrisL> I can revise the proposal and make it public for Friday

flexbox and css3 images

Publication status of flexbox and css3-images

Bert: Will be officially published tomorrow

<ChrisL> bb: they wil be published tomorrow

<ChrisL> ... fixed a few markup errors, so please do a cvs update before further edits

Bert: longer answer is, I had to fix markup errors in the drafts, so next time you update do cvs update first

<scribe> ScribeNick: ChrisL

Percentage corners

EE: Add this or defer? Already added in Mozilla
... and they will be removing the vendor prefix soon
... prefer to defer it 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

DB: Need to remember to remove it when we drop the border prefix

PL: This has been implemented since the *90s*

DB: Don't reacll seeing actual uses of it

BK: Does the prefix form continue to be supported?

DB: probably not

PL: Whats the problem with having percentage values in there?

EE: There are two differing interpretations of what a percentage means

BK: Suggested on www-style how to handle them
... one radius is based on width, two is based on the relevant side

DB: Agree with Hakon and say they are always based on width or height
... if you want a particular shape you will use particular units

BK: How do you get ovals?

DB: One alsways based on width the other based on height

SZ: So its based on the border thickness?

DB: No the size of the box

<dbaron> so you'd get a circle with border-radius: 50%

<dbaron> or an ellipse

<dbaron> depending on the shape of the box

<fantasai> Brad: If you want quarter-circle corners that are not ellipses, then you don't use percentages

<fantasai> Brad: 10% height is different from 10% width

BK: So if you want quarter circle corners, you just can't use percentages?

<fantasai> Peter: The only thing you couldn't get that way is a percentage-based curve that is always circular

PL: If there is only one dimension specified, make it the width. Then you can get both behaviours
... always get a circular border

<fantasai> Peter: I kinda like Brad's idea that the percentage is always based on the width if you only specify one percentage

EE: Normally if there are two values and you can drop one, its duplicated, but does not give different behaviour
... so its not like other shorthands

SZ: Its duplicating the computed value, not the specified one

<fantasai> Peter: Another way to get that would be to have a width unit. 0.5width

PL: Or make new units like a width unit. 0.5W
... width 50% is the same as 0.5W
... could be introduced down the road

EE: opera also has percentages implemented

BB: Any other case where you want percentages, apart from elliptical boxes?

<anne2> (if this is about borders, we might have removed those due to compat issues)

<anne2> (supporting percentages there, that is)

<fantasai> anne2, yes, this is about borders

<anne2> (sites were using it expecting it not to work)

<sgalineau> i believe i've seen border-radius used to make a circle

PL: Mac buttons with rounded ends irrespective of button length

<fantasai> anne2, huh?

<anne2> fantasai, what is unclear?

<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

<fantasai> ...

SZ: If I make the corner a constant size and make the box bigger the corner becomes more square. Don't want that

<fantasai> anne2, why they would want to use it expecting it not to work

EE: Anne says percent border radius might have been removed from Opera

SZ: not been in a released build anyway
... Like Brad and Peter's suggestion with the single value

<anne2> fantasai, dunno, the Web is a fun place

<anne2> fantasai, you should know, you've done QA :)

PL: Not hearing consensus, out of time

<sgalineau> fantasai, i don't expect the browser i use to work :)

<anne2> fantasai, I guess they were just trying something, didn't work in IE, but didn't remove it

adjourned

- DRAFT -

CSS WG telcon

22 Jul 2009

Attendees

Contents

CSS3 Background

flexbox and css3 images

Publication status of flexbox and css3-images

Percentage corners

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output