[csswg-drafts] [css-backgrounds] background-position definition doesn't reflect reality. (#3501)

emilio has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts:

== [css-backgrounds] background-position definition doesn't reflect reality. ==
https://drafts.csswg.org/css-backgrounds/#background-position doesn't mention at all `background-position-x` or `background-position-y`, of which `background-position` is a shorthand of.

These properties should be defined. For example, Gecko accepts `background-position-y: <keyword> <length>?` (due to the legacy 3-value syntax) while Blink / WebKit don't.

cc @ericwilligers, you did some yak-shaving re. 3-value position syntax and such,  do you know which syntax does background-position-* accept in Blink?

Is there any plan to avoid supporting the three-value positions in `background-position` as well?

Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3501 using your GitHub account

Received on Thursday, 10 January 2019 11:59:41 UTC