Re: content: url() is bad

On 15 Apr 2004 at 8:24, Boris Zbarsky wrote:

> 
> staffan.mahlen@comhem.se wrote:
> > Aha sorry, i didn't realise quirks could possibly affect something 
> > like this (is "replacedness" of broken images really a major 
> > backwards-compatibility issue?).
> 
> Think spacer.gif images that are 404 (very common, actually).  If you 
> replace them with an inline representation of the alt text (not even 
> usually empty!)....

Interesting. I would have thought that allowing (legacy) layouts 
based on 404:s to fall apart would have been acceptable. Do you 
expect browser vendors to use the new suggested default style for img 
in quirks mode when this proposal is a part of a recommendation? 
 /Staffan