Re: content: url() is bad

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>
> So the semantics are "stuff before '/' replaces, stuff after '/' becomes
> kids"?  And if I just want an image inside my h1 I would do:
>
>    h1 { content: url(whatever) }
>
> and if I want it to replace I do:
>
>    h1 { content: url(whatever) / contents }
>
> and this incidentally _forces_ me to include a fallback of some sort for
> the replacement URL?

Yes.


> I kinda like it, actually.

I prefer it to having two properties. I'm not yet convinced I prefer it to
having "one <uri> means replaced, two keywords means not" though.

-- 
Ian Hickson                                      )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
U+1047E                                         /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
http://index.hixie.ch/                         `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'