W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 1997

Cascading Style Sheets

From: Gregory Houston <vertigo@triberian.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 1997 11:31:30 -0500
Message-ID: <33BBD3E1.9ECC95F0@triberian.com>
To: www-style@w3.org
I have noticed a couple benefits of using Netscape's <layer>s tags over
using CCS positioning. I hope that you might consider taking these into
consideration when you make the next revision of CCS.

1. I don't have to use <table>s with Netscape's <layer>s. With <layer>s
if I define a layer as 128 x 128 pixels with a red background, thats
exactly what I get. But with CCS, nothing will show up until I put some
content in the layer, and then the red background color will only appear
around the text. Thus I still have to fool with <table>s if I want to
use CCS. And ... thus, I'll be sticking with Netscape's <layer> tag
until this is fixed.

2. Netscape has a much better system of dealing with clipping. I have
yet to get what I want with CCS positioning. But with <layer>s I have
full control to animate the clipping. This is much more powerful than
merely animating the width and height of a layer.

3. This part I'm not sure about, but so far I have not been able to add
a background image to my CSS layers. I can do so very easily with
<layer>s, and those background images can be transparent gifs.

Thank you for your time,
-- 
Gregory Houston                 Triberian Institute of Emotive Education
vertigo@triberian.com           http://www.triberian.com 
phone:    816.561.1524          info@triberian.com
cellular: 816.807.6660          snail: PO Box 32046 Kansas City MO 64171
ICQ UIN:  840273

     "Empowered, impassioned, we have a lust for life insatiable!"
Received on Thursday, 3 July 1997 12:36:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:50 GMT