- From: Jens Brueckmann <lists@j-a-b.net>
- Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:46:06 +0200
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:15:09 -0700, Brian Sexton <discussion-w3c@ididnotoptin.com> wrote: >> Considering usual stacking order I would rather interpret it the other >> way >> round, foo at lowest level, followed by bar and any other image in order >> of appearance, much like layers are added on top of each other in image >> editing software. > > In other words, the issue seems to regard the z-axis (depth/stack), not > the y-axis (display height/flow). I do not know what Ian Hickson had in mind when posing his question. For me it does not make much sense to question the ordering of multiple background images with respect to the x/y-plane. I would rather consider it very irritating if there was no consistency between CSS2 and CSS3, handling the background shorthand property. In CSS2, a single background image specified via the shorthand property is positioned at the top left corner of the element's box and is repeated horizontically and vertically. Why should this behaviour change when two or more images are specified? For non-repeated background images positioning is achieved through adding the desired values. Besides, stacking and overlapping allows for more flexibility. Cheers, jens -- Jens Brueckmann http://www.j-a-b.net/
Received on Thursday, 28 October 2004 16:46:31 UTC