W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2008

Re: fallback color for background-image (ISSUE-5)

From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2008 10:17:35 +0100
Message-ID: <47F8952F.9060804@david-woolley.me.uk>
To: www-style@w3.org

Patrick Garies wrote:
> 

> h1 { background: transparent url("image.png"); }
> @missing resource("image.png") { /* missing is a synonym for disabled, 
> blocked, unsupported, malformed, inaccessible, incomplete, etc. 
> resources */
>    h1 { background-color: black; }
> }

You would have to tie the h1 and @missing lines together, so that the 
@missing group is only obeyed if the h1 group would have won in the cascade.

Note that this example is degenerate in that the only selector in the 
@missing block is h1, but that would have to be enforced, if one was to 
avoid other selectors being introduced that were incompatible with a 
subsequent, or !important, h1 rule that changed the background image to 
one that did exist.

-- 
David Woolley
Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
Received on Sunday, 6 April 2008 09:18:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:04 GMT