- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 15:09:44 -0800
- To: verdy_p@wanadoo.fr
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Philippe Verdy <verdy_p@wanadoo.fr> wrote: > In note that the [css3-background] module is not consistant with the > current definition of the [css3-images] module, with regards to image > fragments, and more generally to the desire of selecting fragments of > a resource to select a part of the resource to be used as a a source > of images to render (possibly animated if the resource is a video). > > For example the [css3-images] module uses a very unfriendly fragment > identifier with a fixed keyword to specify cropping parameters > (#xywh=x,y,w,h). Not only this keyword is ugly, but it also prohibits > using a resource containing multiple parts (not just one image or one > video), for example if the resource is a ZIP or JAR archive, or even > an SVG document, which have their own way to select a part of their > content and specifying their associated content-type. > > For this reason, the syntax for url(resource-url#resource-fragment) > should remain fixed so that the #resource-fragment remains ONLY > interpreted according to the content-type of the resource at the given > resource-url. CSS did not define that fragment syntax. As the spec explains and links, it is defined by the Media Fragments spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/media-frags/ ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 8 November 2012 23:10:31 UTC