W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2012

RE: [css4-background] background-position-x and background-position-y or logical directions

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 22:34:27 +0000
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
CC: Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3C4041FF83E1E04A986B6DC50F0178290AD38DA4@TK5EX14MBXC265.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
[Brad Kemper:]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > Speaking for ourselves I think we have established we are willing to
> > drop features to the extent there is a standard equivalent e.g. see
> > the legacy IE filter property in
> > IE10 [1]. I cannot say whether or when we would flip this particular
> > switch at the Moment but in principle we have no opposition to
> > dropping support for legacy features given solid interoperable standard
> alternatives.
> 
> I think webkit never drops anything though. I suspect that would cause them
> drag down the advancement of logical sides in background-position (start,
> end, head, foot), unless a way can be found for them to peacefully coexist
> with background-position-x and background-position-y.

Past/current WebKit policies should not really be a decision factor. The reason
we suspect WebKit folks might object should be though: a large amount of existing 
content. If a new proposal were to extend the syntax that is already supported in 
a backward-compatible manner - i.e. existing content remains valid and renders the 
same - I don't see why anyone should object. Now, if the proposal involves a 
compat-breaking syntax makeover I suspect I would agree with such objections. 

But if we do need to break compatibility - e.g. because there is no good way to 
align the feature with current CSS requirements - then, as fantasai and Tab noted, 
why not address the use-case properly? 

Either we do not want to leave content behind and we must be backward-compatible.
Or we want a long-term standard solution to spriting and we should not shoe-horn 
ourselves into background-position hacking. Wouldn't spriting be useful in non-background
scenarios?
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2012 22:35:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:55 GMT