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

Re: [css3-lists] remove "Complex Counter Styles" and "Optional Extended Counter Styles" sections

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 17:52:20 -0600
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDuco5+qRRSsB1Ng-VEeyRqujuHBTxTA5urthw7=_igxg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com> wrote:
> Also sprach Tab Atkins Jr.:
>
>  > > > (Though, if we *did* decide that we didn't care about values past 100
>  > > > or so, I'm pretty sure I could express them as an additive style in a
>  > > > much shorter way than explicitly listing values in a non-repeating
>  > > > style.)
>
> Seeing that, shorter, additive, description would also be helpful.

It would look almost exactly like the shorter existing additive
styles.  To do the values up to 100 would take about 20
comma-separated values.  To do up 1000 would take 30, if it's
compatible.

>  > > That's a very good reason for writing it out. So, yes, I'd like to see it.
>  >
>  > I don't understand.  I didn't give a reason to write it out.  I gave
>  > reasons *not* to write it out: it's a non-trivial amount of work for
>  > me
>
> But you're asking UAs to implement the algorithm, no?

I don't understand.  What does that have to do with this?

~TJ
Received on Friday, 25 November 2011 23:53:15 GMT

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