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

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

From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:18:42 -0700
Cc: Mark <markg85@gmail.com>, Giovanni Campagna <scampa.giovanni@gmail.com>, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, www-style@w3.org
Message-id: <3C2D0AE6-D0FF-4C4B-A553-5D21D20A3D50@me.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
On Jun 3, 2009, at 7:04 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

> The issue, though, is that this type of property is (a) specific to
> backgrounds, when there are a lot of places where we probably want
> crossfade transitions, and (b) really *only* necessary for
> transitions, as any place where you are layering static backgrounds or
> other images you can adjust the opacity yourself in any common image
> editor.

That's true, but doing so forces you to use an alpha PNG, which is
considerably larger than the equivalent opaque GIF or JPEG.

We've also run into situations where separate control of the background
and foreground opacity of an element would be useful. The existing
opacity property has the disadvantage that it is applied after  
compositing
with descendants, so it's impossible for a child to be more opaque than
its parent.

Simon
Received on Wednesday, 3 June 2009 16:19:22 GMT

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