W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2009

Re: About multiple backgrounds' syntax

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:49:35 -0500
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0904211649q1ef73d42n47ca3a15046c486c@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 5:04 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> David Hyatt wrote:
>> His twitter is about a specific issue, namely allowing multiple color
>> values in the background syntax.  I have said before I think this is a dumb
>> idea, and current implementations (like WebKit) do not allow this.  I am
>> still hopeful that allowing multiple colors will be scrapped.  It's just a
>> terrible idea.  I believe scrapping it is on the table, since that was one
>> of the issues recently raised in that list that was sent out a few days ago.
> Feedback from authors on the feature has been positive. It's mainly
> the current syntax that's a problem.

The ideal would be if there was an explicit syntax for defining
fallback, rather than relying on particular properties to define
fallback parsing themselves.

Then it would be trivial to just tack a color at the end of the
fallback list, and it would be much more obvious what that means.

"background: fallback( url(foo.png), url(foo.jpg), black);" would
work.  It just fails the "don't nest parens" rule we implicitly design

Received on Tuesday, 21 April 2009 23:50:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:07:35 UTC