- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:17:37 -0500
- To: www-style@w3.org
A comment in the spec says: # Is �background-stretch� a better name? People also suggested to use # �background-stretch: none� instead of �auto� in that case. I think we should go with 'background-stretch'. It gives a clearer idea of what the property does: background-size could be interpreted as setting the size of the background area, not the size of the image. I'd keep 'auto' as the initial value though, especially since scalable images (aspect ratio, no height/width) will always be stretched. ~fantasai
Received on Friday, 18 January 2008 20:17:48 UTC