- From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
- Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 13:14:30 +1000
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Christian Sciberras <uuf6429@gmail.com>, www-style@w3.org
On 5/08/2011 2:21 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Christian Sciberras<uuf6429@gmail.com> wrote: >> ========= Introduction ========= >> >> This issue has been previously covered here: >> >> http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/9 >> >> I believe the example used does not highlight the importance of such a feature. > [snip] >> ========= Conclusion ========= >> >> - Without background-position-[x|y], there is a lot more code and more >> room for error. >> - State positions cannot be separated from type/subject positions. >> - Code is significantly larger to replace this feature. > > Hi! Thanks for emailing the list! > > As you indicated, this has been discussed before, and rejected. I > believe the reasoning for it being rejected is still valid. They were rejected due to image sprites if I am correct. I agree with both Brad and Jonathan in their use in animation. @keyframe y-axis-downwards { from { background-position: 30% 0%; } 50% { background-position: 30% 50%; } to { background-position: 30% 100%; } } The below would be easier and would also allow 'background-position-x' to be animated independently or just declared outside the keyframe with a single value (background-position-x: 30%). @keyframe y-axis-downwards { from { background-position-y: 0%; } 50% { background-position-y: 50%; } to { background-position-y: 100%; } } -- Alan Gresley http://css-3d.org/ http://css-class.com/
Received on Friday, 5 August 2011 03:15:06 UTC