W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2004

Re: content: url() is bad

From: Anne van Kesteren (fora) <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 12:08:40 +0200
Message-ID: <407A6AA8.90800@annevankesteren.nl>
To: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>, www-style@w3.org

>>How is this worse than list-style-image?  Or is it?
> 
> Almost nobody uses list style image, they put the image into the HTML
> (and don't use list elements)!

Most people use a background-image on the LI element, since that is more 
consistent between browsers (with the downside effect that they are not 
clickable to select the LI contents).

> The problem, especially, if you do not enforce a restriction to generated
> content, is that most page designers treat HTML, CSS and DOM and EcmaScript
> as a single language and will mix and match features from all of them
> to achieve their intended visual and behavioural result, so if CSS generated
> images allows a certain hack, they will use them, even if they image is
> real content.  They already use CSS background images as real content,
> to construct fancy controls[1], and it is standard practice to use content
> to achieve purely presentational effects.

I see you have a lot of problems with page authors (just like you had 
problems with my css-forms proposal), but it is not up to the W3C to 
educate those people. As Ian Hickson showed, there are perfectly valid 
examples for this technique.

Tutorials should address the issues you mention, not specifications.


-- 
  Anne van Kesteren
  <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Monday, 12 April 2004 06:09:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:28 GMT