Re: content: url() is bad

Ian Hickson wrote:
> So the image in an <img> is not the element's contents?

No.  It's what the element _is_.  The contents of an element are 
something the element is a box around.... bug again, maybe that's just me.

> Ah. I'm finding it difficult to understand why whether the content causes
> height/width 'auto' to mean 'intrinsic' rather than 'fill' changes whether
> it is content or not...

There are other differences between replaced and non-replaced elements 
(for example, the handling of before/after may need to be different; see 
previous discussions we've had on that).  So it's not just width/height 
handling.

-Boris