Re: image-fit and image-position renamed?

On Sep 22, 2009, at 8:14 AM, Håkon Wium Lie wrote:

> I suggest that we either (1) stick to the current "image" names but
> specify that this can apply to <video> as well, or that we (2) rename
> these to 'content-fit' and 'content-position'.
>
> My preference would be (2).

Of those two choices, I prefer the first. Video is a series of images,  
so it is not that hard to think of 'image-*' as something that would  
apply to video too. But "content" implies so much more (such as  
including text), and so I don't think that name is as clear.