W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2011

Re: [css3-lists] Opinion on the 'range' descriptor

From: Alexander Shpack <shadowkin@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 12:30:17 +0300
Message-ID: <BANLkTikAVy1QO27Je2qA+Ejom2p187EnBg@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:52 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> Right now counter styles have a 'range' descriptor, which defines an
> explicit range for the style.  Counter styles also have implicit
> ranges based on their algorithm; for example, numeric styles have an
> implicit range of [-inf,inf], while alphabetic styles have an implicit
> range of [1,inf].
>
> Hakon observed that there doesn't seem to be a good use-case for
> explicit ranges on any type except additive, and I think he's probably
> right.  I can only come up with a single case where it can be useful,
> as an alternate way to define "fixed-width numeric" styles:
>
> @counter-style decimal-fixed-3-1 {
>  type: override decimal;
>  range: 0 9;
>  prefix: '00';
> }
>
> @counter-style decimal-fixed-3-2 {
>  type: override decimal;
>  range: 10 99;
>  prefix: '0';
>  fallback: decimal-fixed-3-1;
> }
>
> @counter-style decimal-fixed-3 {
>  type: override decimal;
>  range: 100 999;
>  fallback: decimal-fixed-3-2;
> }
>

IMO, it's too complicated.

@counter-style decimal-fixed-3 {
 type: override decimal;
 overlay: "000";
}

UA must intersect current counter value and overlays' pattern

000
+
__1
-------
001


000
+
_99
------
099

As simple as possible

-- 
s0rr0w
Received on Thursday, 28 April 2011 09:30:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:39 GMT