W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2009

Re: background-position-x & y

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:41:56 -0600
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0901141341x6c0f10a5r7dac32fcfaa9cc2f@mail.gmail.com>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Cc: (wrong string) Ÿ" <faruk@apple.com>, www-style@w3.org

On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 3:08 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday 2009-01-14 12:41 -0800, fantasai wrote:
>> Agreed. sprite() is much preferable to extending url().
> I'm not sure "sprite" is really what we want to call it.  Maybe
> "image" or "image-region"?
> Anyway, my previous proposal from the last time this came up is in
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2007Sep/0061.html

I have no particular problem with your proposal.  I sort of don't like
the nested functions, but given url parsing rules, it's probably
impossible to avoid.

Can we avoid the commas , though?  The less commas I have to write in
CSS, the better.

Received on Wednesday, 14 January 2009 21:42:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:23 UTC