It is pure CSS as explicitly defined on the page, i.e. no images used. Just beca...

icebraining · on Jan 3, 2012

It's not his definition. Pure means "Not mixed or adulterated with any other substance or material". Here there is JS mixed, hence it isn't pure.

ugh · on Jan 3, 2012

The point. You are missing it.

He or she uses CSS for a job for which usually images are used. Hence his or her use of CSS is pure in that sense and it’s also written down that way. It’s not misleading in any way, shape or form.

HN. A community of whiny know it alls.

okal · on Jan 3, 2012

You can make your point without resorting to insults. I was pointing that it can set the wrong expectation, as I understood it, having seen things such as the game disussed on http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2582457, which is in fact CSS only. Like I said, I think it's is an awesome demo. Out.

icebraining · on Jan 3, 2012

I understand what you're saying. I don't agree with it.

Not that I have any problem with it being pure or not, just with your reply to okal.