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

Re: [css3-images] element() in css3-image

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:09:07 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBOxy2XgY+iWwdsJqOOx8t3ZDToDf=caAq667DOOWOR6Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:05 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> On 02/29/2012 12:26 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:43 AM, fantasai wrote:
>>> In that case it can be removed without changing the meaning of the spec,
>>> so let's do that and avoid the concerns about it.
>> Uh, no.  It's a useful example of how host languages can extend the
>> set of matchable elements.
> Sure, it's a nice example. But it doesn't change anything meaningful,
> and is therefore not critical. I'd rather add a nice example when
> there's a spec we're all happy to reference than put in an example
> that may become invalid within the next month.

If it does, we change it.  Not a problem, since it'll be editorial.
Images will spend a little while in CR, after all, certainly long
enough to stabilize the feature in the example somewhere.

>>> If I want to use an SVG paint server as a background, and in order to do
>>> that I have to insert the<pattern>  element into every HTML file I apply
>>> my stylesheet to, that's pretty broken feature design whatever you want
>>> to call it.
>> Or you can use scripting to generate it and insert it into the
>> document.  This is identical to the case where you want to use a
>> <canvas>  as the background.
> And this is better how?

It's equivalent to the common case of using a <canvas> in element(),
so it's at least as good as that.

Received on Wednesday, 29 February 2012 21:09:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:11 UTC