fantasai wrote: > > Eric A. Meyer wrote: >> >> At 10:03 AM -0700 1/29/08, Alan Gresley wrote: >> >>> Giving the 'background-origin' property an extra value. This does >>> make sense. >> >> Another possibility is to rename what's now 'background-origin' to >> 'background-edge' or 'background-bound' (which seems to be what it's >> really about) and then have a brand-new 'background-origin' that is >> actually used to define the origin corner. The horizontal and >> vertical offset values defined in 'background-position' would then be >> calculated from the corner defined in 'background-origin', which would >> default to 'top left' or 'top-left' or whatever. > > The disadvantage of this is that it doesn't fall back as nicely. When > the offset and the corner are both specified in 'background-position', > you lose both at the same time rather than keeping the offset, but > offsetting against the wrong corner. > > E.g. > > background-position: bottom right; > background-position: bottom 10px right 10px; > > would fall back to the bottom right corner in older UAs. If you split the > property to > > background-origin: bottom right; > background-position: 10px 10px; > > then the fallback positions the image 10px from the top left corner > instead. Oh, also we already have background-position: bottom right; Adding another property that takes the same values would be a bit confusing, I think. ~fantasaiReceived on Monday, 21 April 2008 22:56:49 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:05 GMT