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

Re: Multiple Background Images

From: Brian Sexton <discussion-w3c@ididnotoptin.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:16:06 -0800
Message-ID: <004301c4df1e$fdb00240$651aa143@desktop>
To: "Ted Shanyfelt (by way of Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>)" <ted@ahi.uhh.hawaii.edu>
Cc: <www-style@w3.org>

> My point is that this whole thing of multiple backgrounds
> seems inconsistent with the rest of CSS, possibly out of
> scope of CSS, and probably not worth the bloat, confusion,
> and ripple effects that may result from it.  I see it as
> more likely to be abused for borders than used as intended,
> and I expect the intended result could be better achieved using
> a single SVG image for a background.  Furthermore, from a
> pilosophical point, if you have one in front of the other,
> I'd hesitate to call the front image a background image.

By denying what could be a very useful presentation aspect of CSS, you 
practically encourage the use of alternate methods of presentation, 
including redundant composite background images, HTML/XHTML tables for 
non-tabular data, and possibly just forgoing accessible HTML/XHTML with CSS 
for 100% SVG or Flash.  How would that be for inconsistent, out-of-scope, 
bloated, confusing, and rippling?

Furthermore, what exactly do you mean by "abused for borders"?  Anything 
that you would not personally do?  The Web is more than textual documents, 
but whether creating documents, applications, or something else, I think 
there needs to be some artistic license. 
Received on Saturday, 11 December 2004 01:16:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:35 GMT