On Nov 23, 2011, at 8:40 AM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: >> On 11/23/11 11:29 AM, L. David Baron wrote: >>> 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. >> >> Ah, ok. That makes sense, and seems backwards-compatible. Is that what >> WebKit and Opera actually implement, though? > > Not WebKit. We currently make "div { content: url(foo); }" turn the > div into a replaced element. So, that is the last (and only) item in the comma separated list, but instead of being a div containing an anonymous replaced inline element, the div itself is a replaced element? Is there an advantage to doing it that way?Received on Wednesday, 23 November 2011 16:55:53 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:07 UTC