Confirm, emeritus
969
edits
Changes
→Proposed values
In SVG it may make sense to be able to have separate treatment for fill and stroke. In that case maybe the values 'all', 'fill', 'stroke' and 'painted', 'paintedFill', 'paintedStroke' would make sense. The former three would ignore opacity and visibility, the latter three would not. In fact, for these extra names to make a little more sense in CSS box model contexts such as HTML where you have 'background' and 'border' instead of 'fill' and 'stroke', the names could be 'all', 'perimeter', 'interior', and 'painted', 'paintedPerimeter', 'paintedInterior'.
To address usecase 23, it would be useful to have an "inked" value. The question is what to do when authors don't want to take account of some inputs that affect whether a pixel is inked, such as filters, markers, masking.
== To merge... ==
