W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2007

Re: [CSS3] foreground-image

From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2007 12:35:40 -0700
Message-ID: <000901c7f186$46642b70$f502000a@internal.toppro.net>
To: <www-style@w3.org>, "Eric A. Meyer" <eric@meyerweb.com>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eric A. Meyer" <eric@meyerweb.com>
To: <www-style@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: [CSS3] foreground-image

> At 11:56 AM -0700 9/7/07, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>>To be able to define in CSS rendering of <img> element I propose:
>>1) to add set of attributes that are similar to background-*** attributes
>>but named foreground-***: foreground-image, foreground-position, etc.
>>Having this standard <img> rendering can be defined in CSS as
>>img {    foreground-image:url(attr("src"));
>>   foreground-stretch: 100%;
> I may be confused, but how would this differ from:
>    img {content: url(blah);}
> ...or, given a hypothetical extension of the 'url' value:
>    img {content: url(attr(src));}
> ?

The @content defines only one piece of information - source of
image but it does not define how bits are being rendered: stretched,
positioned, etc.  That is the main problem.

In ideal CSS world it should be able to define rendering
of all HTML elements by having some "stock style sheet"   
that can be applied to any abstract DOM tree, html, xhtml or xml - 
does not matter. 

Think about <button> with icon for example.

   background-image: url(os-theme:button-normal);
   background-stretch: 100%;
   foreground-image: url(http://something);
   foreground-repeat: no-repeat;
   foreground-position: 3px center;
   padding-left: 23px;

button.with-icon: hover
   background-image: url(os-theme:button-hovered);


Andrew Fedoniouk.
Received on Friday, 7 September 2007 19:36:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:30 UTC