- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
- Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 13:40:20 +0000
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 07/02/2014 13:26, Stewart Brodie wrote: > Example 18 shows multiple comma separated values for the background > shorthand and describes the values assigned to each individual sub-property, > using this example: > > background: url(a.png) top left no-repeat, > url(b.png) center / 100% 100% no-repeat, > url(c.png) white; > > It explains that for background-repeat, this means: > > background-repeat: no-repeat, no-repeat no-repeat, repeat; > > I think it should be: > > background-repeat: no-repeat, no-repeat, repeat; > > If not, then why not? The example says "is equivalent to", which I think is technically correct. "no-repeat no-repeat" and "no-repeat" are equivalent within one comma-separated part. However, I think this trick does not help the reader, and the example would be better as you say it should be. -- Simon Sapin
Received on Friday, 7 February 2014 13:40:46 UTC