- From: Leif Arne Storset <lstorset@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 13:36:21 +0100
- To: "Erik Dahlstrom" <ed@opera.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com> skreiv Wed, 22 Feb 2012 13:16:45 +0100 > In sections 5.4 and 5.5: > > [[ User agents MAY accept ‘image-fit’ as an alias for ‘object-fit’, as a > previous version of this specification used that name. Authors must not > use ‘image-fit’ in their stylesheets. ]] > [[ User agents MAY accept ‘image-position’ as an alias for > ‘object-position’, as a previous version of this specification used that > name. Authors must not use ‘image-position’ in their stylesheets. ]] This is because printers (from HP, I assume) use the property in firmware. [0] It may not be a significant argument against your proposal, though: these old printers will never be declared conforming to css3-images anyway. Unless new printers have to work with old drivers or software or something. > Are there any precedents in any CSS specifications for this kind of > aliasing? It sounds to me like a good way of introducing > incompatibilities between user agents. > > Please consider removing the sentences that allow 'image-fit' and > 'image-position'. 0. Nearest thing I can find for a citation for that is http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jul/0538.html. Not a very solid one, I must admit. -- Leif Arne Storset Core Technology Developer, Opera Software Oslo, Norway
Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2012 12:36:55 UTC