538

When defining something like a background image URL in a CSS file, when using a relative URL, where is it relative to? For example:

Suppose the file /stylesheets/base-styles.css contains: 

div#header { 
    background-image: url('images/header-background.jpg');
}

If I include this style-sheet into different documents via <link ... /> will the relative URL in the CSS file be relative to the stylesheet document in /stylesheets/ or relative to the current document it's included to? Possible paths like: 

/item/details.html
/about/index.html
/about/extra/other.html
/index.html
Improve this question
0

7 Answers 7

Reset to default
599

According to W3:

Partial URLs are interpreted relative to the source of the style sheet, not relative to the document

Therefore, in answer to your question, it will be relative to /stylesheets/.

If you think about this, this makes sense, since the CSS file could be added to pages in different directories, so standardising it to the CSS file means that the URLs will work wherever the stylesheets are linked.

Improve this answer
Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

8 Comments

looks like there is an exception to the rule: -ms-behavior in IE :(
there is another exception: when the url is the default value of a custom property. Say you define .banner { background-image: var(--bgimg, url('images/default.jpg')); }, but don’t define a value for --bgimg yet. Then on the page /index.html, a .banner will look for /images/default.jpg, but on another page /about/index.html a .banner will look /about/images/default.jpg. very broken IMO.
correction: the default value bug above is fixed in Chrome v60.
if your css is in a bundle the path really doesn't matter. It's not where you think it's going to be, nothing is relative anymore.
I had issues when using properties: background: var(--primary-color-background) no-repeat center center url("maps.jpg"); This did not work in IOS and Safari. Only absolute path /resources/maps.jpg works in Safari in conjunction with a css property.
|
80

It's relative to the CSS file.

Improve this answer

Comments

60

It's relative to the stylesheet, but I'd recommend making the URLs relative to your URL:

div#header { 
  background-image: url(/images/header-background.jpg);
}

That way, you can move your files around without needing to refactor them in the future.

Improve this answer

5 Comments

What difference does the extra "/" at the front make?
Just like pathnames on the command line, the leading / at the front of the path means it points to an absolute resource on the current web server.
There's actually a case where it's better to use URIs relative to the CSS file. In my case, I have a directory "/css/" where I put all the CSS data. Now, I want to test new features on the website in a separate folder. It gets hard to test, e.g., new background images in the test folder. It all depends on your needs...
Absolute paths makes it difficult to put solution in a subfolder of the domain. There are a number of reasons why you want to support subfolders. It makes it easier to do testing (as Diego mentioned) where you can have previous version/pre-releases located on the same domain as prod. Future changes where corporate proxy servers are set up to support SSO, moving all solutions to one domain, etc. Especially with SSL one might want to avoid the overhead of multiple domain names to maintain. For me these considerations are much more important than "easier to move my .css-file".
images and stuff like that goes to cdn anyways so this is perfect
33

In order to create modular style sheets that are not dependent on the absolute location of a resource, authors may use relative URIs. Relative URIs (as defined in [RFC3986]) are resolved to full URIs using a base URI. RFC 3986, section 5, defines the normative algorithm for this process. For CSS style sheets, the base URI is that of the style sheet, not that of the source document.

For example, suppose the following rule:

body { background: url("yellow") }

is located in a style sheet designated by the URI:

http://www.example.org/style/basic.css

The background of the source document's BODY will be tiled with whatever image is described by the resource designated by the URI

http://www.example.org/style/yellow

User agents may vary in how they handle invalid URIs or URIs that designate unavailable or inapplicable resources.

Taken from the CSS 2.1 spec.

Improve this answer

Comments

16

For CSS style sheets, the base URI is that of the style sheet, not that of the source document.

(Anything else would be broken, IMNSHO)

Improve this answer

Comments

7

One issue that can occur, and seemingly break this is when using auto minimization of css. The request path for the minified bundle can have a different path than the original css. This may happen automatically so it can cause confusion.

The mapped request path for the minified bundle should be "/originalcssfolder/minifiedbundlename" not just "minifiedbundlename".

In other words, name your bundles to have same path (with the /) as the original folder structure, this way any external resources like fonts, images will map to correct URIs by the browser. The alternative is to use absolute url( refs in your css but that isn't usually desirable.

Improve this answer

1 Comment

This saved me a load of time! Thanks. It should be documented more
-5

Try using:

body {
  background-attachment: fixed;
  background-image: url(./Images/bg4.jpg);
}

Images being folder holding the picture that you want to post.

Improve this answer

Comments

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.