Re: background-position-x & y

On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 3:08 PM, L. David Baron <> wrote:
> On Wednesday 2009-01-14 12:41 -0800, fantasai wrote:
>> Agreed. sprite() is much preferable to extending url().
> I'm not sure "sprite" is really what we want to call it.  Maybe
> "image" or "image-region"?
> Anyway, my previous proposal from the last time this came up is in

I have no particular problem with your proposal.  I sort of don't like
the nested functions, but given url parsing rules, it's probably
impossible to avoid.

Can we avoid the commas , though?  The less commas I have to write in
CSS, the better.


Received on Wednesday, 14 January 2009 21:42:36 UTC