- 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