Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

note how orientation metadata affects naturalWidth/Height #5358

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Mar 18, 2020

Conversation

heycam
Copy link
Contributor

@heycam heycam commented Mar 16, 2020

Implements #4495 (comment), pointing out that image orientation metadata affects naturalWidth/naturalHeight on img, and that the image-orientation property has no effect.

(See WHATWG Working Mode: Changes for more details.)


💥 Error: write EPROTO 140222018242432:error:1407742E:SSL routines:SSL23_GET_SERVER_HELLO:tlsv1 alert protocol version:../deps/openssl/openssl/ssl/s23_clnt.c:772:

💥 ###

PR Preview failed to build. (Last tried on Mar 16, 2020, 9:15 PM UTC).

More

PR Preview relies on a number of web services to run. There seems to be an issue with the following one:

🚨 HTML Diff Service - The HTML Diff Service is used to create HTML diffs of the spec changes suggested in a pull request.

🔗 Related URL

If you don't have enough information above to solve the error by yourself (or to understand to which web service the error is related to, if any), please file an issue.

heycam and others added 5 commits March 16, 2020 14:00
This allows us to pick up the automatic rotation of the dimensions of
images with orientation metadata, such as in JPEG EXIF tags.
- We don't linebreak in the references section uls
- It appears the spec name has changed
- L. Verou added as an editor
- Apparently the spec is split into two now :(
Copy link
Member

@domenic domenic left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I pushed some minor fixups, including some more just generally related to straightening out our references situation for CSSIMAGES. LGTM, although if you could verify I didn't mess anything up that'd be ideal, and I guess @annevk was the most involved in #4495, so getting his double-check would also be nice.

(There's a remaining issue where the CSSWG seems inconsistent about whether "Module" is used in the titles, and we seem inconsistent about, when it is present, whether we respect it or omit it in our <cite> title references. Also, this is the first time we have two levels of the same spec referenced, I believe. So things aren't perfect. But I tried to judge them in the direction of slightly better.)

@tabatkins
Copy link
Contributor

Module is in the "long" titles (and should be consistent, I can go check/fix if not), but feel free to cite with the short forms.

@heycam
Copy link
Contributor Author

heycam commented Mar 16, 2020

Thanks @domenic. Re "We don't linebreak in the references section uls", maybe CONTRIBUTING.md can be updated to mention this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants