ISSUE-20
stretch vs shrink
Does 'backgound-repeat: round' shrink or stretch images?
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- CSS3 Backgrounds and Borders
- Raised by:
- Bert Bos
- Opened on:
- 2008-04-04
- Description:
The current draft says that 'background-repeat: round' shrinks images, if needed, so that exactly a whole number of images tiles the background. If a background image is almost as wide as the element, say 99%, that means it gets scaled down by almost 50% to make room for a second image. Should the image instead be scaled up by 1% in such a case? Counter argument: it's rare that images are scaled down by much, because 'round' is typically used when the author expects more than two tiles; and scaling up usually makes for uglier results than scaling down.
- Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- [css3-background] Issues and Proposed Resolutions (from fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net on 2008-05-13)
- ISSUE-20 (stretch vs shrink): Does 'backgound-repeat: round' shrink or stretch images? [CSS3 Backgrounds and Borders] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2008-04-04)
Related notes:
2008-08-11 10:06:25: Closed no change. [Elika Etemad]
Display change log
