AaronW
10-02-2004, 01:31 PM
Wouldn't it make sense for CSS to be able to support multiple backgrounds on the same element? Wouldn't this eliminate the majority of superfluous markup on our pages?
The way I see it working is like this:
elm {
background: url('header.png') repeat-x top left;
background: url('footer.png') repeat-x bottom left;
}
Both rules would be applied. While now they overwrite each other, I think the mechanism for overwriting should be the mere presence of a background colour including the 'transparent' keyword.
elm {
background: url('header.png') repeat-x top left;
background: transparent url('footer.png') repeat-x bottom left;
}
The second rule would overwrite the first.
There may be a better way to implement it, but this is the first any only method that popped into my head, aside from background[] = ..., which would just be crazy.
So what do you all think? Is the general public even able to suggest things like this to the W3C, or what? I just think it makes sense...
The way I see it working is like this:
elm {
background: url('header.png') repeat-x top left;
background: url('footer.png') repeat-x bottom left;
}
Both rules would be applied. While now they overwrite each other, I think the mechanism for overwriting should be the mere presence of a background colour including the 'transparent' keyword.
elm {
background: url('header.png') repeat-x top left;
background: transparent url('footer.png') repeat-x bottom left;
}
The second rule would overwrite the first.
There may be a better way to implement it, but this is the first any only method that popped into my head, aside from background[] = ..., which would just be crazy.
So what do you all think? Is the general public even able to suggest things like this to the W3C, or what? I just think it makes sense...