- From: Lawrance Family Member <lawranc5@airmail.net>
- Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 14:09:41 -0500
- To: "Garth Wallace" <gwalla@hotmail.com>, <www-style@w3.org>
>How about we don't and say we did?
You've got a good point
>Really, that seems a little too complicated. How about "foreground-"
>properties (equivalent to the "background-" properties) like
>"foreground-image" and "foreground-attachment" for text masking
effects.
>They would be simpler to use and a hell of a lot more flexible.
Sure! Perhaps CSS should even allow for a URL to be in place of an RGB
triplet in the color (or font color) properties.
for instance:
P {
font-color: "yellowstripes.gif"
}
>Still, a _simple_ gradient-fill property wouldn't be a bad idea. Just
>having all of those options would make a conforming browser fill up a
9G
>hard drive. And what about somebody who thinks of a style he/she wants
>to use that isn't in your list? Bitmaps are bad news, stay away.
Definately! I must admit that after I posted the original idea, I
thought that that would be somewhat excessive...
-Joey
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
http://www.geekcode.com
GCS/SS/TW d+(++) s-: a17 C++++ U--- !P !L !E W+++
N+++ o+++ K? w+++++ O---- !M V PS+ PE+++ Y+++
PGP->+++ t++@ 5 X++++ R- tv++(+) b++(+++) DI+++
D@ G+ e- h!>--- r y>+++++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Received on Saturday, 16 May 1998 15:10:10 UTC