- From: Brian Sexton <discussion-w3c@ididnotoptin.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:16:06 -0800
- To: "Ted Shanyfelt (by way of Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>)" <ted@ahi.uhh.hawaii.edu>
- Cc: <www-style@w3.org>
> My point is that this whole thing of multiple backgrounds > seems inconsistent with the rest of CSS, possibly out of > scope of CSS, and probably not worth the bloat, confusion, > and ripple effects that may result from it. I see it as > more likely to be abused for borders than used as intended, > and I expect the intended result could be better achieved using > a single SVG image for a background. Furthermore, from a > pilosophical point, if you have one in front of the other, > I'd hesitate to call the front image a background image. By denying what could be a very useful presentation aspect of CSS, you practically encourage the use of alternate methods of presentation, including redundant composite background images, HTML/XHTML tables for non-tabular data, and possibly just forgoing accessible HTML/XHTML with CSS for 100% SVG or Flash. How would that be for inconsistent, out-of-scope, bloated, confusing, and rippling? Furthermore, what exactly do you mean by "abused for borders"? Anything that you would not personally do? The Web is more than textual documents, but whether creating documents, applications, or something else, I think there needs to be some artistic license.
Received on Saturday, 11 December 2004 01:16:04 UTC