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

Re: [css21] Revising the definition of the 'inherit' keyword

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:34:51 -0800
Message-ID: <4ED460EB.3010901@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 11/18/2011 04:30 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> Sveral telcons ago we discussed the definition of the 'inherit'
> keyword in the 2.1 spec, and agreed to change it to be better in line
> with what CSS3 Cascade says.  Here's my attempted edit:
>
> In 6.1.1, change the ordered list to:
>
> 1. If the cascade results in a value other than 'inherit', use it.
> 2. Otherwise, if the property is inherited or the cascade resulted in
> the value 'inherit', and the element is not the root of the document
> tree, use the computed value of the parent element.
> 3. (unchanged)
>
> In 6.2.1, change the first paragraph to:
>
> Each property may have a cascaded value of 'inherit', which means
> that, for a given element, the specified value of the property is the
> computed value of the property on the element's parent.  If 'inherit'
> is given as a value to a shorthand property, it has the same effect as
> specifying 'inherit' for all of the longhand properties that the
> shorthand represents (even if the combined computed values of the
> longhand properties end up being an invalid value for the shorthand).
>
> I believe that's all the changes that would be necessary.

I agree with Anton that the errata's wording seems fine. We already
have a resolution to fix it, so unless you feel the errata's wording
is insufficient in some way, there's no reason to reopen this.

~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 29 November 2011 04:35:29 GMT

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