Re: [css3-images] gradient sizing for GC?

On Apr 15, 2011, at 9:16 AM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
>> On 4/14/11 8:46 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>> 
>>> An image used as the sole value of 'content' should, imo, turn the
>>> element itself into a replaced element, rather than just filling it
>>> with an anonymous replaced element.
>> 
>> This seems like magic voodoo.  Should these two:
>> 
>>  1) content: url(foo);
>>  2) content: url(foo) '';
>> 
>> really render differently?  The justification for that feels awfully thin.
> 
> In my personal opinion, yes.

What happens when an IMG has no width or height in either the CSS or the image data? Can that happen with SVG?

I would probably expect it to be about the size of one of those missing image icons (question mark in a square). We can't guess at an appropriate size, so encourage authors to set it in CSS. 

I don't think it should be a different size if there is text in the content value too. But I don't get why it would look different if it was a replaced element instead of filled with a replaced element. Is it the difference between 'inline' and 'inline-block' on the display?