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: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 15:43:10 +0100
Message-ID: <20179.40446.205916.918038@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
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.

Is it?

 > >  > > 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?

The spec is asking people to review and (in due course) implement the
pseudo-algorithm. In order to review/implement the pseudo-algorith, I
believe one must have some idea of what it is meant to produce. If we
had the first 100 values spelled out, a reviewer/implementor could see
if there's a match: does the proposed algorithm produce the
written-out values?

As the ED stands, it's impossible for me to review the
pseudo-algorithm in a meaningful way. And it's probably very hard to
review, even if you write one of the languages in question. If the
list of values were spelled out, however, a non-native implementor
could check the results and a native speaker/writer could do even
more.

Another reason for writing it out is that we may see patterns that
allow us to declare the values in a more compact form (like you have
suggested).

Cheers,

-h&kon
              Håkon Wium Lie                          CTO °þe®ª
howcome@opera.com                  http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Monday, 28 November 2011 14:43:42 GMT

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