W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2011

Re: [css3-images] 'image-fit/position' alias for 'object-fit/position' not needed

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 14:45:50 -0800
Message-ID: <4D41F59E.2040202@inkedblade.net>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Leif Arne Storset <lstorset@opera.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 01/27/2011 02:19 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:18 PM, fantasai<fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>  wrote:
>> On 01/27/2011 09:14 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 3:47 AM, Leif Arne Storset<lstorset@opera.com>
>>>   wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The 'object-fit' and 'object-position' properties ask:
>>>>
>>>> # Do we need to allow browsers to alias ‘image-position’
>>>> # and ‘image-fit’ (the old names for these properties)
>>>> # to these properties? Does any browser actually need
>>>> # to do so?
>>>>
>>>> I believe only Opera has implemented these, and they were released with
>>>> the
>>>> 'object-' names from the beginning. Besides, they were prefixed, so I
>>>> don't
>>>> think it would matter anyway.
>>>
>>> Removed, thanks for the clarification!
>>
>> They weren't there for browser implementations, Tab, they
>> were there for printer implementations. I don't think you
>> should have removed that.
>
> Were they unprefixed in printers?

They might have been. I'll have to check with HP.

~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 27 January 2011 22:46:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:36 GMT