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

[css3-background] background-size vs background-stretch

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:17:37 -0500
Message-ID: <47910961.30203@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org

A comment in the spec says:

# Is ‘background-stretch’ a better name? People also suggested to use
# ‘background-stretch: none’ instead of ‘auto’ in that case.

I think we should go with 'background-stretch'. It gives a clearer
idea of what the property does: background-size could be interpreted
as setting the size of the background area, not the size of the image.
I'd keep 'auto' as the initial value though, especially since scalable
images (aspect ratio, no height/width) will always be stretched.

~fantasai
Received on Friday, 18 January 2008 20:17:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:58 GMT