W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2002

Last call comments on CSS3 Module: Backgrounds

From: Steven Pemberton <Steven.Pemberton@cwi.nl>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 16:56:39 +0200
Message-ID: <01e401c25f23$990f3540$2002a8c0@srx41p>
To: <www-style@w3.org>
Cc: "HTML WG" <w3c-html-wg@w3.org>

(Apologies for the lateness)

First some textual comments, then some philosophical ones.


References CSS2; should that not be CSS2.1?

3. Background

"For HTML documents"; please replace with "For HTML (but not XHTML)

Example 1.
This is an incorrect XHTML document. Please put a namespace declaration on
the <html> element, or change the DOCTYPE to HTML 4.01

3.2 background-image

What are the conformance properties for an 'image'? Is text/html OK for the
URI here? You don't say either way.

"Authors should also specify a background color" what is implied by 'should'
here? Why do you have this sentence here? Do you mean 'it is advisable'?

3.4 Background attachment
"At least for the HTML and BODY elements". Say what? I think you mean "at
least for the root element (and BODY in HTML)"

Missing reference here.

3.6 background-clip


3.9 Background-quantity

This property is not sufficiently self-describing. "background-repetitions"
would be better.

Value "infinite" is misleading. I would suggest "auto" as a better

The description needs to define if the repetitions get clipped, or if only
an integral number of them get rendered.

It should also describe what happens if the prescribed number of repetitions
don't fit (clip? reduce the number? reduce to fit?)

3.10 Background-spacing

Shouldn't this be called "background-padding"? It looks like padding to me.
What appears in the space? Please define.

7. Acknowledgments

Steven Pemberton's affiliation was then (CWI), and is now (W3C/CWI)

Now the philosophy...

It has long worried me that there is a large mismatch between the background
and foreground in CSS. Look how difficult it is to get a large light-grey
word DRAFT in the background of a document: you have to use an image, or do
all sort of tricks with text in the foreground to make it look like it's in
the background.

And then you can do different things to images in the foreground and
background: you can size an image in the foreground but not in the
background, and you can repeat an image in the background, but not in the
foreground. Odd. It makes me think that the background should really be a
pseudo-element, and not a collection of properties beginning 'background-'.

Best wishes,

Steven Pemberton
Chair, HTML WG
Received on Wednesday, 18 September 2002 10:56:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:03 UTC