W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > July 2008

RE: [css3-gcpm] [css3-page] Named page lists

From: Grant, Melinda <melinda.grant@hp.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 00:48:50 +0000
To: fantasai <fantasai@inkedblade.net>, Michael Day <mikeday@yeslogic.com>
CC: "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
Message-ID: <763AE400FE923441B74861D534DF254943F45AFFF7@GVW0433EXB.americas.hpqcorp.net>


Maybe a child could inherit not only the list, but the parent's current page name within the list as well...?

Melinda

> -----Original Message-----
> From: fantasai [mailto:fantasai@inkedblade.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 4:15 PM
> To: Grant, Melinda; Michael Day
> Cc: www-archive@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [css3-gcpm] [css3-page] Named page lists
>
> Grant, Melinda wrote:
>
> >  fantasai wrote:
> >> Grant, Melinda wrote in response to adding named pages
> without making
> >> 'page' a non-inherited property:
> >>
> >>> Haven't thought about it, but one option would be to add
> page-list
> >>> or some such.
> >>
> >> And how would that interact with 'page'? (Two properties
> that try to
> >> control the same thing in CSS doesn't really work.)
> >
> > I dunno, last one in or some such.
>
> Last one specified in the cascade? Yeah. That doesn't work.
> It's a little complicated to understand why, so we've had
> many proposals over the years -- from spec editors -- that
> rely on doing that and.. those proposals have had to get
> scrapped and rethought because you can't do it. The cascading
> order is effectively per-property: once the cascade is over
> every property has a value, and you don't know which properties'
> values had a higher cascade weight. You can have a value for
> each property that says "check the other property", but
> ultimately one property has to always override the other.
>
> > What's your proposal?
>
> If we're sure we want named page lists in the future...
>
> We could make 'page' non-inherited, and add an exception in
> the spec saying that UAs may treat it as inherited in CSS3
> because that's how it was specified in the previous CR.
> I don't think it will have much effect on existing content.
> Hmm.. we'd need to add another special value, so we have the
> initial value mean "look at my parent" and some other value
> mean "put me on a normal, unnamed page even though my
> ancestor suggests a named page".
>
> I'm not coming up with anything brilliant today. :/
>
> Michael, any thoughts on this? The discussion started with
> this: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Jul/0029.html
>
> ~fantasai
>
Received on Thursday, 3 July 2008 00:50:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:18 GMT