- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 21:35:00 -0700
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: Lev Solntsev <greli@mail.ru>, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:14 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > On 10/09/2013 02:38 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Lev Solntsev <greli@mail.ru> wrote: >>> >>> While compatibility is good thing to concern, background-position syntax >>> gives more possibilities. An element can be positioned from the bottom >>> right corner. Also it's good for i18n—positioning from the right edge >>> is an usual case in RTL-manner styling. >> >> >> You can do that without the <position> syntax - just use calc(). 20px >> from the right edge is "calc(100% - 20px)". The <position> syntax >> makes this more convenient/readable, but the only difference in >> ability is the functionality of percentages. > > calc() does not allow for logical position keywords. I'm well aware of that, which is why I support a shape() function as discussed by Alan as well, so that when we actually extend <position> to have logical keywords, it'll work there. In the meantime, though, you can still position from either the left or the right side. ~TJ
Received on Friday, 18 October 2013 04:35:50 UTC