RE: [css3-2d-transforms][css3-images] <position> grammar is duplicated or points to the wrong spec from Brian Manthos on 2012-01-24 (www-style@w3.org from January 2012)

From: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 18:56:44 +0000
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
CC: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, fantasai <fantasai@inkedblade.net>
Message-ID: <9710FCC2E88860489239BE0308AC5D170EB1FA64@TK5EX14MBXC264.redmond.corp.microsoft.>

Tab:
> <position> is the *only* place in CSS where this problem (percentages treated differently than equivalent lengths) crops up, so
> attempting to reason from 'width' isn't very useful.

Incorrect.

The background-position property is the only place.

The <position> token isn't the problem.

Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2012 18:57:34 UTC