Re: [css-masking] Editorial: Intro / Interactions / Definitions

Hi fantasai,

Thanks a lot for your feedback!

On Mar 12, 2013, at 10:05 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:

> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/FXTF/raw-file/default/masking/index.html#intro
> 
> This paragraph:
>   # A mask is applied using the ‘mask’, ‘mask-image’ or ‘mask-box-image’
>   # properties. The mask source may be defined using a ‘mask’ element
>   # referenced by the ‘mask’ property. Alternatively, for many simple
>   # uses, the ‘mask-image’ property may refer directly to graphical
>   # elements or images to be used as mask forgoing the need for an
>   # explicit ‘mask’ element. The ‘mask’ property is also a shorthand
>   # for other masking properties. ‘mask-box-image’ splits a mask image
>   # into 9 pieces. The pieces may be sliced, scaled and stretched in
>   # various ways to fit the size of the mask image area.
> 
> is a rather awkward progression. Maybe start with the simple stuff
> and end with the 'mask' shorthand?

I agree, I'll work on an easier introduction and upload it within the next three days.

> 
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/FXTF/raw-file/default/masking/index.html#placement
> 
> The intention of this section is mainly to show how the features here
> plug into / override other bits of CSS. The first paragraph does a good
> job of this.
> 
>   # Definitions of CSS properties and values in this specification
>   # comply with definitions in CSS Backgrounds and Borders [CSS3BG].
> 
> However this paragraph and the table below it imo should shift to
> Terminology.

I did the suggested change. The shift seems very logical.

> Also:
>   - "comply with" is kindof weird. UAs comply with specs, but saying
>     that css-masking complies with css3-background makes little sense.
>     Maybe you mean "are analogous to"?

Yes, that sounds better :)

>   - "Every reference will be marked clearly." is unnecessary. I'm glad
>     that's your goal, but it doesn't need to be stated here. :)

Removed :)

> 
>   # Some property and element definitions in this specification require
>   # an SVG 1.1 implementation [SVG11]. UAs without support for SVG [...]
> 
> And this paragraph belongs in the Conformance section.

Shifted as well.

> Btw, if you
> have suggestions for improving the conformance template (like, making
> it less awful to read), I would be happy to take them…

Even if I read this section, I tried to avoid improving it :D. I try my best to send suggestions.

> 
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/FXTF/raw-file/default/masking/index.html#definitions
> 
>   I suggest s/Definitions/Terminology/. Most of the spec is defining
>   things, yes? :)

Yes, this is probably right. Now I need to go over three other specifications using this schema :) Done on masking.

> 
>   # The term user coordinate system is equivalent to the term local coordinate system.
> 
> Would suggest just putting two <dt>s above the "local coordinate system"
> definition then.

That sounds like a good idea.

> 
> Your markup is very confused:
>   <a class="element-name" href="#MaskElement">‘<code class="property">mask</code>’</a>
> Perhaps some other convention than what you're using is needed to distinguish
> CSS property names from markup element names? In the CSS specs we tend to
> wrap element names in angle brackets instead of quotes, for instance.

I fully agree with you. However, this is a requirement of the preprocessor of the SVG specification to link to the relevant sections in SVG. I need to check with Cameron how to improve this. In SVG2 elements have a different styling (red), which does not seem to be accessible for me.

I landed the other changes in[1]. Thank you again for your review.

Greetings,
Dirk

[1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/FXTF/rev/f0bee7474714


> 
> ~fantasai
>

Received on Wednesday, 13 March 2013 20:19:40 UTC