- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 08:55:16 -0800
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Nov 23, 2011, at 8:40 AM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
>> On 11/23/11 11:29 AM, L. David Baron wrote:
>>> If 'content' contains a single url(), the only way to make the value
>>> fit the grammar is by making that url() part of the<content-list>
>>> production, in which case it is not treated as a replaced element.
>>
>> Ah, ok. That makes sense, and seems backwards-compatible. Is that what
>> WebKit and Opera actually implement, though?
>
> Not WebKit. We currently make "div { content: url(foo); }" turn the
> div into a replaced element.
So, that is the last (and only) item in the comma separated list, but instead of being a div containing an anonymous replaced inline element, the div itself is a replaced element? Is there an advantage to doing it that way?
Received on Wednesday, 23 November 2011 16:55:53 UTC