- From: Sean M. Hall <pianoman@reno.com>
- Date: 12 Apr 2004 17:57:04 +0000
- To: www-style@w3.org
The specs have a replacement for
element {
content: url(image.gif);
}
see http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-css3-ui-20030703/#icon-property
CSS3 now has a *standardized* method for image replacement, the icon property.
The above CSS becomes:
element {
icon: url(image.gif);
display: icon;
}
I guess even the creators of the specs themselves thought that content: url() was bad so they came up with an alternative (which no browser supports yet; test page: http://www.geocities.com/seanmhall2003/css3/misc.html)
Of course, this may be wrong. I'm just concluding that that is what icon is used for.
Yesterday Peter-Paul Koch published the second version of Javascript Image Replacement (http://www.quirksmode.org/?dom/fir.html), and the only browser it is buggy in is MyIE2. I believe that until icon is well-supported we should use Javascript to replace text with images, not the "evil" content: url() or the unsupported icon property.
Dante Evans
'Scuse me while I kiss the sky
Received on Monday, 12 April 2004 13:57:53 UTC