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

Re: [CSS2.1] Background boundaries and attachment

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:14:08 +0000 (UTC)
To: fantasai <fantasai@escape.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0401271511240.29190@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, fantasai wrote:
>>>
>>> You'd have to add an extra element solely for presentation.
>>
>> So how would you do the opposite (image fixed with the border of the
>> element instead of scrolling with the content) without using extra
>> elements?
>
> background-attachment: fixed;    /* fixed wrt viewport, which has the effect of being
>                                      fixed wrt the border when the parent scrollbox
>                                      isn't being scrolled -- which covers frames behavior*/
> background-attachment: attached; /* hypothetical CSS3 property: fixed wrt border */

background-attachment: fixed; /* fixed wrt viewport */
background-attachment: scroll; /* fixed to element */
background-attachment: content; /* fixed to content */

I don't understand why one is better or worse than the other. I seem to
recall the decision to define it the way it is was more based on the
weight of existing implementations at the time than preferences either way
on the issue, since the two options are pretty much symmetric.

-- 
Ian Hickson                                      )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
U+1047E                                         /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
http://index.hixie.ch/                         `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 27 January 2004 20:45:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:25 GMT