CSS shape() function

[noamr]

こんにちは TAG-さん!

I'm requesting a TAG review of CSS shape() function.

{{One paragraph summary of the feature, ideally copy-pasted from your Explainer.}}

• Explainer¹: https://drafts.csswg.org/css-shapes-2/#shape-function
• Specification: https://drafts.csswg.org/css-shapes-2/#shape-function
• WPT Tests: https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-masking/clip-path?label=master&label=experimental&aligned&q=shape%28 https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-shapes?label=master&label=experimental&aligned&q=shape%28
• User research:
• Security and Privacy self-review²: https://gist.github.com/noamr/6897ab8bddbcc6189cd39761f60d48f2
• GitHub repo: w3c/csswg-drafts
• Primary contacts:
  • @noamr, Google Inc, developing and editing the spec
• Organization/project driving the specification: Google, Apple
• Multi-stakeholder support³:
  • Chromium comments: Chromium is actively implementing this.
  • WebKit comments: WebKit is actively implementing this. https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=238371
  • Mozilla comments: CSS shape() function mozilla/standards-positions#1153
  • {{...include feedback/review from developers, implementers, civil society, and others}}
• Status/issue trackers for implementations⁴: https://g-issues.chromium.org/issues/40829059 https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=238371

Further details:

• I have reviewed the TAG's Web Platform Design Principles
• Relevant time constraints or deadlines:
• The group where the work on this specification is currently being done:
• The group where standardization of this work is intended to be done (if different from the current group):
• Major unresolved issues with or opposition to this specification:
• This work is being funded by:

You should also know that...

{{Please tell us anything else you think is relevant to this review.}}

---

CAREFULLY READ AND DELETE CONTENT BELOW THIS LINE BEFORE SUBMITTING

Use links to content rather than pasting text into this issue. Issues are ephemeral and most of the material we are asking for has long term value.

Please preview the issue and check that the links work before submitting. Please make sure anyone with the link can access the document. We may refuse to review anything that is not public.

¹ We require an explainer to give the relevant context for the spec review, even if the spec has some background information. An explainer must address user needs and contain examples of use. For more information, see our explanation of how to write a good explainer.

² A Security and Privacy questionnaire helps us understand potential security and privacy issues and mitigations for your design, and can save us asking redundant questions. See https://www.w3.org/TR/security-privacy-questionnaire/.

³ For your own organization, you can simply state the organization's position instead of linking to it. This includes items on Mozilla standards-positions, and WebKit standards-positions. Chromium doesn't have a standards-positions repository and prefers to use comments from the teams that maintain the relevant area of their codebase.

⁴ Include links to Chrome Status, Mozilla's, WebKit's Bugzilla, and trackers for other implementations if those are known to you.