- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 16:06:43 -0800
- To: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote: > I'm thinking that a better property name would have been background-fill: > > background-fill: [tile | tile-x | tile-y | extend | none] > > but it's probably too late to add that now. Agreed on both points. If I define an @image rule (which I'm thinking I will, though I'll probably wait for Image Values 4), I'll likely name the property 'fill' or similar. > One question is whether you'd ever want to both tile an image with > infinite extent, and well as have 'extend' behavior. I could imagine > wanting to tile radial gradients, yet have them all extend to get a > a certain "wall of cones" type effect. Hm, I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean, do the whole repeat-at-offsets thing that tiling does, but do an extend and then composite all the images together? ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 16 December 2010 00:07:36 UTC