- From: Alan Gresley <alan1@azzurum.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 01:20:41 -0700
- To: Brad Kemper <brkemper@comcast.net>
- cc: www-style@w3.org, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Brad Kemper wrote: > On Jan 28, 2008, at 11:15 AM, fantasai wrote: > > > > > Brad Kemper wrote: > >> 3rd and 4th values of "background-position". I don't think this is > >> a good reason to throw out such a good idea, of having 4 values > >> for background-position that match the syntax of margin, padding, > >> and the various border and outline sub-properties. > > > > > > It doesn't match. > > > > margin: top-and-bottom left-and-right; > > vs. > > background-position: top left; > > > > ~fantasai > > > > Oops. You're right. My bad. The big problem is it's one system that does not quite relate to another system. For margins, padding, border-width, and outline you have this: property: value; /* top, right, bottom & left */ property: value value; /* top - bottom (y-axis) & left - right (x-axis) */ property: value value value; /* top, right - left (y-axis) & bottom*/ property: value value value value; /* top, right, bottom & left */ For background-position background-position: 0; /* left (x-axis) & auto (y-axis) */ background-position: 0 0; /* left (x-axis) & top (y-axis) */ My proposal allowing four values (I would not suggest three) would mimic those for the margins, padding, border-width and outline. In one way it simplifies things for authors by matching the same edge for background-position with those for margins, padding, border-width and outline. On the other hand it can (will) cause total confusion. Maybe what I seeking is a property: background-position-coord: 0 0 0 0; I have prepared a somewhat detailed reply to Fantasai's message, more coming. Alan http://css-class.com/
Received on Tuesday, 29 January 2008 08:21:01 UTC