You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
While 3eef526b41b7 and da3321fc5996 (see also #216) updated css-content-3 to say that the 'content' property accepts <image> values, no other parts of the spec appear to have been updated.
In particular, 2.2. URI is still totally in terms of <url>.
The spec needs to describe how <image> values work, in terms of the definitions provided in css-images, at the level of detail needed to implement interoperably.
This is apparently already implemented in some engines (e.g., Blink, IE, Edge), and there's a Mozilla bug on implementing in Gecko.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
An example question that this spec should answer is: while we know that the width property doesn't apply to the image in content: "hello" url(foo.png) "world", does it apply to the image in some cases (e.g., if the image is alone (might be a compat risk if it's after a comma), or only if the image is before a comma)?
Also, I realize that perhaps section 2.2 is about the <content-list> part of the definition, and maybe that should remain about <url>. However, the handling of <image> values still needs to be defined.
While 3eef526b41b7 and da3321fc5996 (see also #216) updated css-content-3 to say that the 'content' property accepts <image> values, no other parts of the spec appear to have been updated.
In particular, 2.2. URI is still totally in terms of <url>.
The spec needs to describe how <image> values work, in terms of the definitions provided in css-images, at the level of detail needed to implement interoperably.
This is apparently already implemented in some engines (e.g., Blink, IE, Edge), and there's a Mozilla bug on implementing in Gecko.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: