[css3-background] background-size: <length>

• From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
• Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 22:12:19 -0700
• To: www-style@w3.org
• Message-ID: <482BC633.9080608@inkedblade.net>

The current spec says that
   background-size: <length> | <percentage> | auto
is equivalent to
   background-size: <length> | <percentage> | auto auto
i.e. that the specified value always applies to the width only.

I think it would make more sense if, when only one value is specified,
it was applied to both the width and the height. For backgrounds there's
no strong reason for the sizing to be width-primary: in many cases the
height is primary. Now most images are not square: any behavior we choose
for handling a single length will be totally arbitrary. But for percentages
I think it will make more sense.

For example
   background-size: 100%;
would stretch the background image to cover the whole area.

Thoughts?

~fantasai

Received on Thursday, 15 May 2008 05:12:55 UTC