Re: [CSS21] Addition of 2 values to the visibility property

On Jun 27, 2008, at 8:55 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Brad Kemper <brkemper@comcast.net>  
> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2008, at 6:16 AM, Simetrical wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 9:24 PM, Brad Kemper <brkemper@comcast.net>  
> wrote:
> You could have a property on the text box like this:
>
> { text-replaced-by: image; }
>
> or
>
> { text-replaced-by: svg }
>
> This is exactly what the content property does in CSS3.
>
>
> Yes, well, except that if I insert an image with 'content:  
> url(header.png), contents;', then it would be a foreground image and  
> I would not be able to crop it with a height or width based on ems  
> or percentage, right? So a little less flexible for flexible  
> layouts. Or if I had other foreground elements to go inside the  
> element (besides the replaced content), wouldn't they be pushed  
> aside by the foreground image?
>
> Well, the clip: property allows you to set it in px or em, or you  
> could always use the simple expedient of setting the height/width  
> and using overflow:hidden.

Good point. Are there any other ramifications of using a foreground  
image instead of a background one?

> Do you often use elements other than text in your replaced  
> elements?  The common use case seems to be replacing the content of  
> a link, where you're just removing some text and putting in an image  
> instead.
>
> ~TJ

The truth is, I don't use FIR technics all that much myself (just a  
couple times), but I am familiar with them and have followed the  
techniques with some interest, and was trying to anticipate whether  
the content property would be enough. It certainly does seem a  
promising alternative to current techniques.

I would like to know the thoughts are of people who actually do a lot  
of this sort of thing, or who have invented new techniques based on  
perceived problems with existing techniques. It seems like content  
property could work, but I don't know what all of the ramifications  
might be.