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

Re: Proposal: background-image-opacity or background-opacity

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 11:43:38 -0500
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0906020943s31db655ex802b2cee9bb88455@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Mark <markg85@gmail.com>, www-style@w3.org
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Jun 2, 2009, at 9:21 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>
>> Mark wrote:
>>>
>>> Now with the css 3 backgrounds module multiple backgrounds are going
>>> to be supported. Webkit has support for it and Gecko is in the
>>> progress of making it all work. Now with that module (once adapted by
>>> the biggest rendering engines) you can give one element both his
>>> normal image and his hover image which is exactly the way it should be
>>> if you ask me. Now i see one issue comming there. If you want to fade
>>> from the normal image to the hover image you currently (if i read the
>>> spec right) can't do that because there is no way of letting either
>>> one of those images disappear, no way to set the opacity per image.
>>
>> Seems like this could be dealt with by just having separate style rules
>> setting the two images and defining CSS transitions on background image to
>> do fade in/out, maybe....
>>
>> -Boris
>>
>
> Yes, I think that fade transitions would be good for a few other properties
> too (those that don't change layout), such as visibility, border-style
> (except for 'none'), content, list-style-image, border-image, etc.

Basically transitioning any image can be done with a fade like that.

Ooh, the thought of transitioning border-style is interesting.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 2 June 2009 16:44:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:18 GMT