Re: [css-images] Changes to image()

On 04/17/2014 11:15 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Dirk Schulze <> wrote:
>> In this case image() has no fallback behavior at all. It’s whole purpose changes completely. The reason why people would use it is just because of image(<color>) and it seems strange that we need a function to specify the color .. or have <url> and <string> at all. Unless people want to have EXIF support of course.
> image() still has several useful things it can do, and some more stuff
> we punted to Level 4, like giving an image directionality (so it gets
> reversed in bidi situations).
> That said, I think the "fallback to solid color" thing is valuable to
> keep, separately from the "choose from multiple urls" case.  I think
> the latter will get farmed out to improvements in image-set() to make
> it match the abilities of <picture> more closely, but the former is
> useful in a different way than resolution enhancements or type
> negotiation is.

My concern with keeping it is largely that we don't know what the
syntax of fallbacks will look like once it's merged with image-set().

Otherwise I agree, the functionality is straightforward and useful.


Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2014 07:26:13 UTC