On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:32 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > On 06/21/2012 07:55 AM, Florian Rivoal wrote: >> For instance, here is a typical example of how they are used: >> .icon { background: url(sprite.png) 0 0 no-repeat; } >> #a { background-position-y: 0; } >> #b { background-position-y: -30px; } >> #c { background-position-y: -60px; } >> .icon:hover { background-position-x: -30px; } >> .icon:active { background-position-x: -60px; } >> >> This can be rewritten with variables: >> .icon { background: url(sprite.png) var(bg-x, 0) var(bg-y, 0) no-repeat;} >> #a { var-bg-y: 0; } >> #b { var-bg-y: -30px; } >> #c { var-bg-y: -60px; } >> .icon:hover { var-bg-x: -30px; } >> .icon:active { var-bg-x: -60px; } > > > If the plan is to solve this use case (spriting), we should do a better job > than > using background-position hacks. I'm with fantasai. The only use-case I've ever seen for background-position-x/y is image spriting, but bg-pos is really shitty for spriting. The right way is to either use Media Fragments, or come up with something else in CSS that accomplishes the same thing. ~TJReceived on Monday, 25 June 2012 21:42:24 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:00 UTC