W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2010

Re: [CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions 2010-02-17

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 11:29:04 -0800
Message-ID: <4B842C80.1060802@inkedblade.net>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 02/23/2010 12:20 AM, Brad Kemper wrote:
> On Feb 18, 2010, at 6:00 AM, fantasai wrote:
>>   - Discussed Yves' comment about background shorthand syntax for background-size
>>       http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Jan/0248.html
>>     fantasai to write up proposal for using 'as' instead of '/' to indicate the
>>     background-size (as opposed to background position) in the shorthand.
> I'm sorry I wasn't able to attend the telecon last week, but this does not seem
> like an improvement to me. The slash is an effective separator for dividing the
> values into chunks. Once you learn the simple rule of what the chunks are (what
> can appear to the left of the slash and what can appear to the right of it),
> then it is easy to recognize what the value represents based on which
> slash-separated chunk it is in. A keyword is less effective in this regard, and
> it is just another word in a series of words and measurements, and less instantly
> recognizable as a separator.
> The word itself, "as", doesn't really say much to me either. Why "as"? If it is
> just supposed to be a prefix for the background-size value, then it seems like
> "size" would be better. But then naming each value part is a long road to go
> down, and I don't think we should start. The slash seems so much better to me.

background: url(foo.png) as 4em; /* foo.png as a 4em square */

>>   szilles: Is there an example elsewhere of a slash without something
>>            before it?
> I think that an example of something that is pretty close is the border-image
> shorthand. It has 2 possible slashes in it to separate the values into 3 chunks,
> but you are not required to having anything in the middle chunk. You can just
  have the two slashes next to each other, with the border-image-width values absent.
> So, to my mind, 'border-image-width' is the missing "something before it" [other
> than another slash separator] example.

The border-image syntax is different in two ways from the background shorthand.

1. The order of the elements separated by the slash is fixed.
2. You cannot drop elements leading into the slash or trailing from it: it is
    always separating two parts of a fixed sequence.

Received on Tuesday, 23 February 2010 19:29:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:07:43 UTC