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

Re: [css21][css3-background] background-position examples conflict with prose/grammar

From: Řyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2010 17:16:42 +0100
To: "Sylvain Galineau" <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.u83rh4niru61ud@oyvinds-desktop>
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 16:40:57 +0100, Sylvain Galineau  
<sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote:

>> From: Řyvind Stenhaug [mailto:oyvinds@opera.com]
>
>
>> That seems more ambiguous, and the presumably intended interpretation
>> ("exactly one value is not a keyword") is wrong since it wouldn't say
>> how to interpret e.g. "background-position: 10px 40px".
>
> I'm not sure whether it's *more* ambiguous since the prose never  
> addressed this case explicitly either.

The case "at least one value is not a keyword" includes the case where  
both values are lengths. Two counts as "at least one".

> How about:
>
> #If one value is specified, the second value is assumed to be 'center'.
> #If two values are specified then the first value represents the  
> horizontal
> #position (or offset) and the second represents the vertical position  
> (or offset).
> #If both values are keywords, the vertical and horizontal components can
> #be specified in any order.

Because the "at least one value is not a keyword" part is omitted, the two  
previous sentences kind of contradict each other. Personally I'd still  
prefer my last suggestion.

> #If three or four value are given....

-- 
Řyvind Stenhaug
Core Norway, Opera Software ASA
Received on Friday, 5 March 2010 16:51:27 GMT

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