W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2010

Re: [css3-background] background-shorthand and its background-clip side-effect

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 08:25:47 -0800
Cc: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Arron Eicholz <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
Message-Id: <3A0583CA-B9CA-42CC-B310-1D4071A59506@gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>

On Mar 5, 2010, at 8:15 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On Mar 5, 2010, at 7:52 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On it's own it not too bad, but as a way to disambiguate between two
>>>> subproperties in in 'background' that take the same values, it is
>>>> inconsistent with any of the proposals to disambiguate <bg-position> and
>>>> <bg-size>.  I don't think this serves authors as well, ultimately, who
>>>> currently have no expectations of how this disambiguation should occur.
>>> 
>>> The position/size disambiguation needs to be more complex, because
>>> there is added possibility of confusion.  Both properties can have one
>>> or two value, so if you see two lengths next to each other, you can't
>>> tell whether it's just one property being specified or two being given
>>> a single value.  Similarly, if you see 3 values you can't tell which
>>> property gets a pair and which gets a singleton.
>> 
>> You can if you use the slash the way I was suggesting, which would also be consistent between disambiguating BOTH the <bg-position>/<bg-size> combinations AND the <bg-origin>/<bg-clip> combinations in the same ways. Thus, the position/size disambiguation does NOT need to be more complex than the origin/clip disambiguation. They can both be simple, with a single slash providing a reference point for disambiguation.
> 
> What I meant is that you don't *need* a slash in the origin/clip
> situation, since you can rely on a simple ordering.  That's not
> sufficient for position/size.  Ordering-based disambiguation is used
> much more commonly throughout CSS, and so should be relied on when
> possible.

Right, but the part you quoted me on was about how the two situations are not consistent with each other, but could be (very simply). My way is still ordering-based; the order is in relation to the slash.

Received on Friday, 5 March 2010 16:26:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:25 GMT