- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 11:57:31 -0800
- To: www-style@w3.org
Reference: http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/#image-notation
Am I correct in my assumptions that two cases below are functional equivalents?
1. el { background: image(a.png ltr, b.png rtl); }
2. el:dir(ltr) { background: url(a.png); }
el:dir(rtl) { background: url(b.png); }
In other words, these ltr/rtl annotators are sensors of what actually?
Options are:
A. *text* direction, defined by direction: property in CSS.
B. element directional context, defined by @dir in HTML and reflected
in el:dir(...), see [1].
And related question:
If "a.png" and "b.png" images are available then "b.png rtl" part here:
el { background: image(a.png, b.png rtl); }
will have no effect, right? "b.png rtl" is more specific , no
specificity in this fallback mechanism?
[1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/selectors4/#dir-pseudo
--
Andrew Fedoniouk.
http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Saturday, 10 March 2012 19:57:59 UTC