W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 1999

Re: Minor error in CSS2, section 14.2; 'background'

From: gordon <gordon@quartz.gly.fsu.edu>
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 20:19:02 -0700
Message-ID: <03a401befa72$11acb6e0$5c5d0418@vista1.sdca.home.com>
To: "'www-style'" <www-style@w3.org>
I tried adding a style element to a test page [XHTML transitional].  The W3C
validator was not happy.  I would suggest that something is fundamentally
wrong when specifications are issued which result in invalid documents.

later,
gordon


----- Original Message -----
From: Braden N. McDaniel <braden@shadow.net>
To: Chris Wilson <cwilso@MICROSOFT.com>; 'www-style' <www-style@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 1999 7:31 PM
Subject: Re: Minor error in CSS2, section 14.2; 'background'


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Chris Wilson <cwilso@MICROSOFT.com>
> To: 'www-style' <www-style@w3.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 1999 9:37 PM
> Subject: RE: Minor error in CSS2, section 14.2; 'background'
>
>
> > I see.  Changes introduced in CSS2 win again.
>
> No, this is consistent with CSS1; CSS2 just spells it out a little more
> clearly. 4.5 of CSS1 includes the rule
>
> "If the 'background' value of the 'HTML' element is different from
> 'transparent' then use it, else use the 'background' value of the 'BODY'
> element. If the resulting value is 'transparent', the rendering is
> undefined."
>
> The intent of this is clarified in the example that follows:
>
> "This rule allows:
>
>   <HTML STYLE="background: url(http://style.com/marble.png)">
>   <BODY STYLE="background: red">
>
> In the example above, the canvas will be covered with "marble". The
> background of the 'BODY' element (which may or may not fully cover the
> canvas) will be red."
>
> > I'd like to see this reconciled with the background attributes on body -
> If
> > HTML is the root display node, then according to CSS the BODY must only
be
> > as large as its content (unless width/height are explicitly given), and
> the
> > BACKGROUND/BGCOLOR would only be shown under the actual content.
>
> Right. In what way do the rules in 4.5 of CSS1 and 14.2 of CSS2 not
achieve
> the reconciliation you're looking for?
>
> > Not to mention, of course, the other proprietary mechanisms introduced o
n
> > BODY long before CSS2.
>
> It seems to me these rules could be extended to cover those extensions,
too;
> though perhaps I'm overlooking something.
>
> --
> Braden N. McDaniel
> braden@endoframe.com
> <URL:http://www.endoframe.com>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 8 September 1999 23:19:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:00 GMT