- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 08:29:00 -0800
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Monday 2011-11-21 08:19 -0500, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 11/21/11 7:44 AM, Florian Rivoal wrote: > >Section "8. Replaced content" says that when the content introduced by > >content: is a single url, then the element or pseudo element is a > >replaced element. > > This happens to not be compatible with what the "content" property > does in CSS 2.1, for what it's worth.... I think you're misinterpreting what it says, or at least what it intended to say (since I think there's a section missing... though I'm having a bit of trouble reading the spec due to the obsoletion notice). http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-content/#inserting-and-replacing-content-with-the describes the value of 'content' as: [ [ <uri> | icon ] ‘,’ ]* [ normal | none | inhibit | <content-list> ] url() values can appear in two different places in this syntax: before a "," or inside of <content-list>. When they appear before a "," they are treated as a replaced element (as the spec describes). When they appear inside of <content-list>, they are processed under the CSS 2.1 model and are not a replaced element. (This bit is less clear because some of the subsections under <content-list> appear to be missing.) If 'content' contains a single url(), the only way to make the value fit the grammar is by making that url() part of the <content-list> production, in which case it is not treated as a replaced element. -David -- 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
Received on Wednesday, 23 November 2011 16:29:46 UTC