W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2012

Re: [css3-images] Image fallback feature's dependency on media fragments

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 21:30:17 -0500
Message-ID: <4F445339.6080405@mit.edu>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: www-style@w3.org
On 2/21/12 9:10 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Boris Zbarsky<bzbarsky@mit.edu>  wrote:
>> On 2/21/12 7:36 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>> Kenny, since Moz already has MF functionality (just under a different
>>> syntax)
>> And also possibly specific to video, no?
> Huh?  I don't understand.  -moz-image-rect() is for images, as is
> image().  What does video have to do with this?

Oh, I see.  Mozilla actually has media fragment support for videos, you 
see, so I assumed you were talking about generalizing that.

-moz-image-rect() is not really generic in Mozilla; it only applies to 
background-image, not to other places images might be used in CSS (most 
notably, 'content').  Extending it to 'content' would be pretty nontrivial.

>>> it looks like a Gecko implementation of the current image()
>>> spec would be pretty easy.
>> I wouldn't assume that.
> Can you elaborate?

Well, for example to sanely handle situations where people have lots of 
references the same image with different fragment identifiers (a 
situation that never comes up now) may well require some changes to the 
image library and image cache in Gecko.  That's off the top of my head; 
it may depend on the exact implementation strategy chosen and such of 

Then again maybe you and I just have different thresholds of "pretty 
easy"?  Mine tends to be counted on hands (ideally no more than one) in 

Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2012 02:30:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:12 UTC