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

Re: [css3-gcpm] [css3-lists] Moving the list-related chapter of GCPM to Lists

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 16:20:03 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBjRahuAkwEP9OZ+Dkr8tQxgrp+DLMmOMvA_RDSpMYZsQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com> wrote:
> Tab wrote:
>
>  > The new predefined list style, super-decimal, is already defined in
>  > the Lists spec.  As well, the Lists spec defines a more powerful
>  > method for defining new named list styles.  It didn't previously have
>  > an equivalent for the symbols() function, but I've now added that
>  > (<http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-lists/#symbols-function>) and aligned
>  > it with the @counter-style syntax and abilities.
>
> Good.
>
> I've removed the list styles from the GCPM editor's draft.
>
>  http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-gcpm/
>
> I also suggest that the GCPM shorthand syntax is added to css3-lists.
> In GCPM, you could say:
>
>  @counter-style daggers "*" "\2020" "\2021" "\A7" "#";
>
> which is a shorthand for:
>
>  @counter-style daggers {
>     type: non-repeating;
>     glyphs: "*" "\2020" "\2021" "\A7" "#";
>  }

Would you really want non-repeating?  The quintessential example you
use, footnotes, should probably be done with the 'symbolic' type
instead (that's what the symbols() function now defaults to).
'repeating' might be a better generic choice, too.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 15 November 2011 00:21:37 GMT

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