Re: content: url() is bad

• From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
• Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 11:27:13 +0000 (UTC)
• To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
• Cc: www-style@w3.org
• Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0404151125530.22246@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004, fantasai wrote:
>
>    content: [ url(image.png) ], "text"; /* does replacement */
>
>    content: url(image.png), "text"; /* does insertion */

Well, this gets back to one of the proposals I used to have:

   content: replaced url(image), "text";
   content: url(image), "test";

...but then I figured "when will you want a single URI on its own to _not_
be replaced" and I dropped the "replaced" keyword.

Oops, we've gone full circle. :-)

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

Received on Thursday, 15 April 2004 07:27:18 UTC