W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > November 2010

Re: [RC3] background-position-202 invalid; comma not a valid separator in CSS 2.1

From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2010 14:51:49 +1100
Message-ID: <4CD0DC55.8000909@css-class.com>
To: css21testsuite@gtalbot.org
CC: Arron Eicholz <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>, "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Gérard Talbot wrote:
[snip]
> .positive .control { background-position: 50%, 0%; }
> What Firefox 3.6.12 does is to ignore the 0% value since there is only 1
> background-image.
> What Chrome 6, 7, Opera 10.63, Konqueror 4.5.2 do is to repeat the
> background-image for the 2nd background-position (0%) value and doing
> this is not correct.
> 
> .positive .control { background-position: 50%, 0%; }
> should be parsed as
> .positive .control { background-position: 50%; }
> and then assume 'center' for vertical background-position because
> "If only one value is specified, the second value is assumed to be
> 'center'."
> 
> Reduced testcase:
> http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/background-position-202-experiments.htm
> 
> IMO, the decisive issue here is that this CSS3 statement:
> "
> The lists are matched up from the first value:
> excess values at the end are not used.
> "
> is not honored by Chrome 7, Opera 10.63 and Konqueror 4.5.2.
> 
> regards, Gérard


In don't know what FF is doing. I see no pink diamonds. Even adjusting 
the CSS to this.

div
   {
   background-image: url("support/diamond.png");
   background-position: 50%;
   background-repeat: no-repeat;
   height: 200px;
   width: 200px;
   }

Thought I could show an image from my server.


-- 
Alan http://css-class.com/

Armies Cannot Stop An Idea Whose Time Has Come. - Victor Hugo
Received on Wednesday, 3 November 2010 03:52:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 3 November 2010 03:52:31 GMT