- From: Lee Kowalkowski <lee.kowalkowski@googlemail.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 15:08:35 +0000
- To: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On 09/11/2010, Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com> wrote: > Lee Kowalkowski wrote: > > [snip] >> Your argument is actually absurd, because it's arguing against >> background-position too, saying one must not use it for image sprites, >> I'm not wishing to debate that. Only the omission of >> background-position-x and -y. >> >> Do you actually have an objection against -x and -y? I haven't seen >> one. These "image-sprites are hacks" objections apply to >> background-position itself also, I'd like to see a specific objection >> to -x and -y. > > If two implementations support a property, it is possible for it to > become a standard. The following is supported in IE8+. As far as I know, background-position-x and background-position-y are supported in IE 4, Chrome 1, and Safari 3. > I would like to see your use cases. Well, I currently have playing card elements with two class names, one for the card's rank, one for the card's suit. The rank determines background-position's X value and the suit determines background-position's Y. I currently have to specify all the possibilities of suit/rank combinations in CSS because I'm unable to specify -x independently of -y. -- Lee www.webdeavour.co.uk
Received on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 15:09:09 UTC