- From: carlosame via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 18:25:09 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
So far, I have been thinking here in terms of problems when parsing an author-specified shorthand, however when it concerns serializing: > Otherwise serializing the property and reparsing could generated different results. Serialization should involve a sanity check of the individual values, that's what I do in my code (admittedly not for all shorthands) and I was assuming that browser people does the same. For example, in tests with real-world sites I found frequent cases where url() PNG images were set to background-color properties, which then bombs a blindly-produced shorthand. So my code checks for those cases. > FF definitely allows you to write list-style-type: inside, and similar. That should not be a problem if you do not produce a shorthand with it (you could produce a shorthand plus the problematic property:value, or keep all the longhands in the serialization). Perhaps that should be the first thing to check out here. -- GitHub Notification of comment by carlosame Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2624#issuecomment-388141567 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 10 May 2018 18:25:16 UTC