I think we should only implement the `background-repeat-{x|y}`. Currently, no
browser engine supports `mask-repeat-{x|y}`. But for `background-repeat-{x|y}`,
Google Chrome already supports it.
In this comment[1], the usage of these properties is above the deprecation
threshold (both usage rate > 0.07%). So, Google Chrome won't remove these
properties. I also found this discussion[2], `background-repeat-{x|y}` are
approved for level 4 of backgrounds and borders.
Currently, for web compatibility, I think we should implement these properties.
The current status on other browser engines is following:
**Microsoft Edge**
No support.
**Google Chrome**
It supports keywords `repeat` and `no-repeat`.
The behavior of `background-repeat-x: no-repeat` is repeat the background only
on y-axis, like `background-repeat: no-repeat repeat`.
The behavior of `background-repeat-y: no-repeat` is repeat the background only
on x-axis, like `background-repeat: repeat no-repeat`.
The behavior of `background-repeat-x: no-repeat; background-repeat-y:
no-repeat;` is repeat the background only on x-axis, like `background-repeat:
no-repeat no-repeat`.
**Apple Safari**
No support.
And there is a site[3] using `background-repeat-x` and `background-repeat-y`.
We can notice that some images should be no-repeat. And it works on Google
Chrome not on Mozilla Firefox. I attached the screenshot in attachments.
[1]: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/116#issuecomment-221668012
[2]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Apr/0188.html
[3]: http://ocando.vnz.la/
--
Tommy Kuo / Software Engineer
ku...@mozilla.com
Mozilla Taiwan
On November 25, 2016 at 02:31:24, L. David Baron (dba...@dbaron.org) wrote:
On Friday 2016-11-25 02:09 +0800, Chih-Hsuan Kuo wrote:
> It means the browser engines can use the properties, but these properties
> don't accept any value. It also means the properties don't work.
>
>
> In Google Chrome, these properties can be auto-completed. And the error shows
> when we set the value to these properties.
>
>
> In Safari, there is no warning symbol on these properties, and the warning
> symbol only shows on the value we set.
So my impression is that you're looking to implement these
unstandardized properties because of Web compatibility risk.
If you're analyzing that risk, it doesn't matter what developer
tools do. What matters is whether the presence of the properties in
Web content does something that we also need to do if we want the
content to behave in the same way.
I can't tell from your comments which other browsers do this.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
What I was walling in or walling out,
And to whom I was like to give offense.
- Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
