- From: Anne van Kesteren (fora) <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 21:03:54 +0200
- To: Masayuki Nakano <masayuki@toybox.jpn.org>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
> In CSS3 G & R contnet module, content property has contents. > However, it cannot spcify replaced-element with its attribute value; > In the case of HTML, OBJECT element is try the uri of "data" > attribue value and if the try failed, its content is rendered. > This behavior is not determined by CSS, it is determined in spec > of source document spec. One of the goals of css3-content is that it _can_ be described using CSS only, especially the IMG and OBJECT elements. > Because CSS3 content property cannot specify them. > In other words, an element in the XML document that is not known > by UA cannot be specified by CSS. Why can't it be described using CSS? object[data]{ content:attr(url,data); } Works perfectly. (Note that this uses a proposal that has not made it into the draft, namely, that 'contents' should be somehow the "final fallback".) > I think best choice of this issue is that adding to uriofattr function. > So, OBJECT elements will be following rules: > > OBJECT{ > content: uriofattr(data), contents; > } I think I understand the confusion, you are not aware of the 'attr()' value "specified" in css3-values [1]? [1] <http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-css3-values-20010713/#attribute> -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Tuesday, 20 April 2004 15:04:24 UTC