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

Re: [css3-cascade] Rolling back the cascade

From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 17:36:58 -0700
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20111101003658.GA18794@pickering.dbaron.org>
On Monday 2011-10-31 12:06 -0700, fantasai wrote:
> And would that be more, less, or equally useful as a value that simply means
> ''initial''/''inherit'' (depending on whether the property inherits by default)?
> That idea was proposed by dbaron here:
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2002OctDec/0191.html

For the record, that message was:

# From: L. David Baron <dbaron@fas.harvard.edu>
# Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 17:15:55 -0400
# To: w3c-css-wg@w3.org
# Message-ID: <20021020171555.A22654@is01.fas.harvard.edu>
# 
# Would it be useful to have a 'default' value, defined to be equivalent
# to 'inherit' for properties that are inherited by default and equivalent
# to 'initial' for properties that are not inherited by default?  This
# might be easier for authors to use than 'initial' and 'inherit' since it
# wouldn't require thinking about whether a property is inherited by
# default or not (which isn't obvious for some properties, such as
# text-decoration and visibility).
# 
# -David
# 
# -- 
# L. David Baron        <URL: http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/ >

-David

-- 
𝄞   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   𝄂
𝄢   Mozilla                           http://www.mozilla.org/   𝄂
Received on Tuesday, 1 November 2011 00:37:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:46 GMT