Re: I would love...

--- Clover Andrew <> wrote:
> > At this moment (edge effects is what i want it for
> > too) the only choice is to have nested tables,
> making
> > rendering slow
> I don't know if it'd do what you're looking for, but
> I'd really
> like to see:
>   border-image: url(/i/border.gif)
> (With the obvious consequent changes to border,
> border-left,
> border-left-image and so on.)
> I'd then like to see attributes like
> border-top-left, which could
> be 'join' for an angled join between the two side
> borders as it
> is at the moment, or a colour or image spec to draw
> something else
> over that corner.
> Then I could get rid of those tables used only for
> borders.
> Which would be nice.
> -- 
> Andrew Clover
> Technical Support
> AG

 What i'm doing is worse: i don't use borders cause
they do take space, making complex edges impossible.
So i'm stuck with using images and positioning. 

On our subject now. From my little (compared to many)
experience, in case of 

border-image: foo.gif;

we desperatelly need something for the corner that
will "overlap" the border, wich just can't be done.
No i'm not talking about a simple joint, i may want to
use an image that wont fit the border size.
What i'm trying to say with my poor english is,
borders take space so they make things difficult (or
impossible). But all problems would be solved if we
could place multiple images (each in it's own place)in
a table. 
background:  transparent url(foo1.gif) repeat-x top
center; b-index:1;
background:  transparent url(foo2.gif) repeat-y top

Where b-index is like z-index but for backgrounds

Kindest regards,
Manos Batsis

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf!  It's FREE.

Received on Monday, 16 October 2000 06:24:03 UTC