RE: Stretchy backgrounds? (background-width,height properties)

Stuart Ballard wrote:

> Since I cannot find any argument *against* this functionality 
> anywhere at all other than the second-hand comment in the 
> message I linked, I would like to ask what it would take to 
> re-open this issue for possible inclusion in CSS3. If there 
> are concrete reasons *not* to specify this, I would at least 
> like to know what they are. If the only reason that it "isn't 
> useful", I would ask the WG members to reconsider this 
> evaluation. At least 5 people have thought it useful enough 

"text-transform: small-caps" should similarly be revisited IMO.
"capitalize" has been proposed for addition in CSS3 in addition to
"uppercase" and "lowercase", so why not "small-caps"?  One objection to
small-caps has been that it's not "useful"[1].  This may be true, but
the frequency of it in print would seem to disprove it.  The other
objection are supposedly i18n issues (the XSL WD has marked
"text-transform" as deprecated on such grounds!).  But that's silly --
if a character set isn't amenable to case-transformation, text-transform
would be ignored!

Another item that should be revisited -- if it hasn't been already
(there was a recent thread on this[2]) -- is a means of selecting the
first so many "words".  I've heard the objections a million times, but
this is requested too often to just dismiss because some languages don't
have word separators.  And there has already been an i18n-friendly
proposal of getting around this -- ::content-to(" ", 5).

Looking forward to something along the lines of ...

     div.chapter + p::content-to(" ",3) { 
         text-transform: small-caps;

Even the most zealous of i18nalists should have no objections that this
"does nothing" to, say, Kanji Zen texts.  :)



Received on Sunday, 8 July 2001 15:56:15 UTC