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

Re: [css3] background-origin question

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 10:22:23 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTimO=UiczNo_xY+bvCk7AgwYP_Fm9M1z0_+-gfPC@mail.gmail.com>
To: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org, Nicholas Morgan <nimorgan@gmail.com>
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 15:57:56 +0200, Nicholas Morgan <nimorgan@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> When I saw "background-origin"
>> (http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-background/#the-background-origin) I got really
>> excited; however, the more I read the more I was disappointed.  I'm excited
>> that I can pass it key words and translate the origin to specific areas
>> inside the element.  But for me it was the same as having
>> "background-position" but only allowing me to have top, right, bottom &
>> left.
>
> Sounds like you are being misled by the term "origin" (its usage for this
> property seems a bit weird, and doesn't really have anything to do with the
> origin of a coordinate system). Note the values allowed, they don't involve
> top/right/etc (or percentages) at all.

Well, it is about the origin of the coordinate system (and the overall
size of the system too); it's just not the more standard meaning of
"take this point in the current coordinate system and make it the new
zero point".

Especially with the expanded background-position syntax in CSS3,
background-origin is pretty useful, since it also redefines where the
right and bottom edges are.


But yeah, sounds like Nicholas is just somewhat confused about the
purpose of background-origin.

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 1 September 2010 17:23:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:31 GMT