- From: Lee Kowalkowski <lee.kowalkowski@googlemail.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 13:57:20 +0000
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On 08/11/2010, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > On 11/08/2010 01:36 AM, Lee Kowalkowski wrote: >> Hi, >> I give my playing card elements class names like "diamonds rank-10", I >> want to apply background-y depending on suit and background-x >> depending on rank, using _different_ class names. > All the use cases I've seen so far are improved hacks for image > sprites. Which is something I think should be addressed directly, > not by making such hacks easier. IMO. You're dismissing this technique as a hack? Do you have any justification for that? I don't understand, is there a technique that you consider to be a non-hack for image sprites? Or are you suggesting that all image sprites are hacks and therefore not worthy of consideration? How would it be addressed directly? Please elaborate. >From my perspective, background-position is a shorthand property without its individual counterparts, this is bizarre, they should be there for completeness. They way I'm currently seeing it, the "hack" is having to specify 52 rules, where I only want 17. -- Lee www.webdeavour.co.uk
Received on Monday, 8 November 2010 13:58:42 UTC