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

Re: [cssom] Directions for better OM expansions

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 10:15:20 -0700
Message-ID: <4C8FADA8.4080706@mit.edu>
To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 9/14/10 10:00 AM, Daniel Glazman wrote:
> That's a valid statement when presentational hints are directly
> translated into CSS styles. Not all can do it, and not all rendering
> engines do it.

The model the CSS specification defines requires doing it, at least 
conceptually:

   If so, these attributes are translated to the corresponding CSS
   rules with specificity equal to 0, and are treated as if they
   were inserted at the start of the author style sheet. They may
   therefore be overridden by subsequent style sheet rules.

(CSS2.1 section 6.4.4).  In particular, any sane definition of cascaded 
style must be affected by presentational hints, since they DO 
participate in the cascade.

> But then a compromise would be to allow read/write when
> the originating rule is a author-level rule or a style attribute, and
> throw an exception in all other cases.

That sounds like a pretty fragile setup to me; whatever consumers do 
will need a fallback for those "exceptional" cases, and then is there a 
reason to not just always use the fallback?

And this still doesn't address issues with shorthands.

-Boris
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 17:15:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:31 GMT