- From: timeless <timeless@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2010 17:11:42 +0300
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Célian Veyssière <celian.veyssiere@yahoo.fr>, www-style@w3.org
i'm catching up on a month's worth of mail (which accumulated during
my vacation).
>> a {
>> background-position: 0 0;
>> }
>> a:hover {
>> background-position: unchanged -50px;
>> }
>> a:visited {
>> background-position: unchanged -100px;
>> }
personally, i'd want "inherit" instead of "unchanged" since "inherit"
exists in css today.
(this isn't an endorsement for the proposal.)
> Typically, this is solved by breaking up the components into
> subproperties, when we consider it sufficiently worthwhile to do so.
> (Every property that exists imposes a memory cost on pages, so we try
> not to be *too* profligate with them.)
yeah, having looked at the proposed expansions for some other things
recently, that splitting absolutely terrifies me.
> In the case of properties that take multiple comma separated values,
> we definitely need a syntax for targetting only a particular item from
> that list. That would make it a lot easier to, for example, change
> just a single background layer or a single text-shadow.
Received on Sunday, 10 October 2010 14:12:21 UTC