How to refer to the corner-shaped padding/border/content edges #5132
Comments
|
I've sent regrets for today's call but I'm fine with the proposed change. |
|
The CSS Working Group just discussed
The full IRC log of that discussion<dael> Topic: How to refer to the corner-shaped padding/border/content edges<dael> github: https://github.com//issues/5132 <dael> florian: A little while back, I believe in context of layout containment, I needed to refer to border edge with its rounded corners if they're rounded or with any future shaping. Couldn't figure out if border-edge implied the shaping or if you need something else <dael> florian: Backgrounds 4 suggests it is themselves shaped but other specs say it's a rectangle. Worth having two terms for the shaped and unshaped so can be specific. Keep the existing term so if it doesn't matter don't have to spec <dael> florian: I think helpful b/c specs which have taken time to say with the rounded corners would have to expand if we added another edge. <dael> florian: Proposal is shaped edge and unshaped edge defintion maybe in Box 4 <dael> smfr: Prefer to avoid confusion with other properties that use shape <dael> florian: Sure. Not attached to the adjective. Just want terms to refer to either <dael> smfr: Rounded? <dael> florian: Rounded is what we have now. If we do bezeled or notched they're not rounded be effect the corners <dael> Rossen_: Can we refer to unshaped corner as bounds. border-bounds, content-bounds which is the rectangle? <dael> astearns: Padding border content edge bounds? <dael> fantasai: A bit confusing with terms for fragmented boxes, though <dael> Rossen_: Too many terms :) <dael> Rossen_: I should be applying padding bounds. <dael> florian: Not attached to particular adjective but I think it should be adj on edge. Mention edge all over the place and sometimes mean with and somethings without. Adding an adjective to edge is easier because then we can amend existing text instead of review all specs and making sure not wrong one <dael> florian: Overall hearing support for idea but not for the bikeshed color so should we go back to GH or twitter and ask for ideas? <dael> astearns: Don't know if this is useful on twitter since it's a spec term <dael> florian: True <dael> Rossen_: I think letting more people chime in on GH is worthwhile <dael> astearns: Prop: Add these terms but bikeshed names in GH issue <dael> astearns: Any concerns about adding? Objections? <dael> fantasai: Good as long as florian mentions base term is same <dael> RESOLVED: Add these terms but bikeshed names in GH issue |
|
adjusted/unadjusted? |
|
Captured in the minutes, but not in the resolution: We're specifically looking for an adjective to qualify the "???? padding/border/content edges", so that the term without the adjective can remain in common use for the cases where that distinction doesn't matter. |
Doesn't conflict with anything, so that's good, but it seems very generic, and it doesn't seem obvious to me: "adjusted in what way?". Cross linking with the spec defining it will help, but a transparent term would be better IMHO. |
|
How about “contoured xxx edge”? |
|
“corner-shaped xxx edge” vs “unshaped xxx edge” with “xxx edge” as the ambiguous term? |
|
I went with “shaped edge” and “unshaped edge”. Agenda+ to confirm and republish. |
|
The CSS Working Group just discussed
The full IRC log of that discussion<keithamus> astearns: fantasai asking if this change is okay<keithamus> fantasai: edge border - curved edge with border radius or just rectangle. I added shaped-edge... does this sound good to peopel? <keithamus> s/peopel/people <keithamus> fantasai: we originally talked about corner shaped edge but we might shape more than just corners <keithamus> astearns: any concerns? <keithamus> dbaron: ...border radius? <dbaron> s/...border radius/is an unshaped edge one that is rectangular, or one with a circular border radios/ <keithamus> fantasai: no border radius with unshaped, just rectangle. e.g. when calculating float. <keithamus> RESOLVED: we will use shaped edge and unshaped edge |
Are the padding/border/content edges rectangular, and then border-radius / corner shaping gets applied, yielding the ???? (shaped padding/border/content edges ?), or are padding/border/content edges themselves modified by border-radius / corner?
In other words, when you want to refer to the shaped padding edge, do you just use cross-ref to padding edge, and let other specs work their magic to shape that appropriately, or do you have to refer to border radius and other kinds of corner shaping?
Reading https://drafts.csswg.org/css-box-4/, there's no mention of radius, corners, or shapes, so that would lead me to believe that the padding/border/content edge are rectangular, and if you want the shaped version, you have to invoke that yourself (or find some term that does that, but I couldn't find it).
On the other hand, https://www.w3.org/TR/css-backgrounds-4/#the-border-radius, seems to suggest that the padding/border/content edge themselves do get shaped, which would mean that you don't need to reach for extra terminology or invoke the effect explicitly.
In addition to being verbose, having to explicitly invoke the effect yourself means that any spec that wants to talk about these edges needs to take a dependency not just on backgrounds-3, but also backgrounds-4 to make sure corner-shape is accounted for as well, and possibly future specs if we add more things later.
I'd suggest that css-box-4 should introduce the terms
shaped padding/border/content edgeandunshaped padding/border/content edge, in addition to the existing ambiguous terms that can continue to be used in the cases where the difference doesn't matter. css-box-4 would explicitely depend on css-background-3 to take border-radius into account, but need not depend on backgrounds-4 forcorner-shaping: backgrounds-4 can itself use that new terminology to say that it modifies it.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: