- 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