Re: Sprites (was: Background position)


On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:06, Sophie <> wrote:
> I tend to favour your first suggestion as it would allow for a more
> flexible grid (a row of icons, a row of higher buttons, etc...). Check
> for example the amazon sprites [1].

My second suggestion [2], using sprite dimensions rather than offsets
still allows for multiple dimensions, though, so they should be
equivalent. My example only had one width and height, but that was
simply because all those sprites had the same dimensions. Using widths
and heights, however, would allow the values to be repeated when
appropriate (in case of simpler sprites), while that isn't possible
with offsets.

That Amazon sprite's going to be hard to do like this, though, because
everything seems to be squeezed together so much that there aren't too
many clear columns and rows. It should be possible with the nesting I
proposed, but it's not going to be pretty.

I might have a go at trying to implement that one as an example later.

> I hadn’t realised clipping was implied.

The only reason clipping isn't done yet now, is because sprites aren't
really supported at all and using background-position for it is really
just a hack.


> [1]

Received on Monday, 25 May 2009 09:43:46 UTC