W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2010

Re: 'initial' | 'inherit' inconsistency

From: Eric A. Meyer <eric@meyerweb.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 14:17:08 -0400
Message-Id: <a0623090bc8ef6d207804@[]>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
At 10:58 AM -0700 10/28/10, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

>It is somewhat inconsistent, but CSS3 Values & Units makes the
>definitive statement that all properties everywhere accept 'inherit'
>and 'initial', and defines what that means.

    Yes, but not many modules reference it, which makes whatever it 
says inapplicable in those cases, does it not?  And then there's the 
cases where properties explicitly define an 'initial' that might be 
at odds with the universal 'initial' that Values & Units defines. 
It's fairly hard to tell.  It also implies that any property that 
explicitly lists 'inherit' could be defining something different than 
the universal 'inherit'.  Maybe they aren't, but do we know?  For 
    I'm still firmly on the side of explicitly listing them on each 
property definition rather than relying on a blanket statement 
located somewhere other than the property definition.  Doing so 
greatly reduces the chances of confusion.

Eric A. Meyer (eric@meyerweb.com)     http://meyerweb.com/
Received on Thursday, 28 October 2010 18:17:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:40 UTC