- From: jsnkuhn via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2022 21:53:45 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
apologies for the confusion I think that some of the example ideas I've posted might fall better under something like `element()`. So let me give this another try: ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1286791/173254572-3fc58a43-1e17-4547-b83f-971bcb02ec7c.png) We have one background image that is then rotated in different ways to create slightly visually different backgrounds for the different links. ``` @image-manipulation rotate-x-y { transform: rotate(180deg); } @image-manipulation rotate-x { transform: rotateX(180deg); } @image-manipulation rotate-y { transform: rotateY(180deg); } a {background-image: url(yellow.webp);} a:nth-of-type(2) { background-image: url(yellow.webp), rotate-x-y; } a:nth-of-type(3) { background-image: url(yellow.webp), rotate-x; } a:nth-of-type(4) { background-image: url(yellow.webp), rotate-y; } ``` in this case having to repeat the `background-image: url(yellow.webp),` bit seems a bit clunky. Maybe there a way to do something more like `manipulation-name` taking a cue from the already existing `animation-name` property? -- GitHub Notification of comment by jsnkuhn Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6807#issuecomment-1153302137 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Sunday, 12 June 2022 21:53:46 UTC