- From: Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 19:20:15 +0200
- To: Aryeh Gregor <ayg@aryeh.name>
- CC: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 23/1/12 18:58, Aryeh Gregor wrote: > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Lea Verou<leaverou@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 23/1/12 18:04, Aryeh Gregor wrote: >>> (Also, the background-position syntax doesn't make sense to me. It >>> allows "left 10% bottom 10%", which is the same as "10% 90%"; but >>> doesn't allow "10% 5px 10% 5px", which is an effect that's not >>> obtainable without using calc(). >> >> So? What's the problem if this case needs calc()? How is calc() a hurdle? >> I think calc(10%+5px) calc(10%+5px) is *much* more readable than 10% 5px 10% 5px, which I had a really hard time figuring what you expect it to do (and I'm still not sure I got it right). > > I agree. By the same token, I think "calc(100%-5px) calc(100%-5px)" > is more understandable than "right 5px bottom 5px", so I don't see a > need for the three- or four-value syntax at all. "right 5px bottom > 5px" looks like four separate positions, not two. I don't think it's debatable that keywords are way more readable than percents. Of course, using a preposition (`5px from right`) would make it even more readable, but would be verbose and would probably require backtracking. In any case, we are way offtopic. :) If you disagree with the background-position syntax, please start a new thread about it (tagged with [css3-background] or [css4-background]) -- Lea Verou (http://lea.verou.me | @LeaVerou)
Received on Monday, 23 January 2012 17:20:56 UTC