- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:58:40 -0400
- To: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
Anne van Kesteren wrote: > >> So here's an alternate proposal: >> Leave image borders for a later draft. >> Publish backgrounds and borders without image borders but *with a >> way of >> specifying multiple backgrounds on a single element*. > > If '::outide' is going to make it, can't we just use that > pseudo-element? Also, a lot of pages are fixed width, like blogger.com > and don't really need multiple backgrounds or border images. What they > need is proper support for '::before' and '::after'. Using ::outside or ::before and ::after to add multiple background images is a workaround. ::outside in particular would not work very well. If you want a fallback background color, it needs to be specified on the element itself so UAs without ::outside support (most of them) can use it. But then the ::outside background will be completely invisible because the element's background color overpaints it. Then there's the problem of the element itself getting margins and positioning while ::outside stays put. Their box edges will no longer coincide, so the background specified on ::outside won't be where it needs to be. If you use ::before and ::after for background images, then you can't use them for generated content. If you want multiple backgrounds, the best way to do it is to make it possible to specify them on the element itself through the background properties. Workarounds are just not going to be as robust. Also, web page design should be fluid. Max-width is ok if it's specified in ems (it can help readability), but requiring my window to be a certain pixel height/width is just wrong, IMHO. -- http://fantasai.inkedblade.net/contact
Received on Saturday, 28 August 2004 15:02:47 UTC