- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:41:56 -0600
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "Zack Weinberg" <zweinberg@mozilla.com>, "Faruk Ates" <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. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 14 January 2009 21:42:36 UTC