W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2012

Re: [css3-values][css-variables] definition of <value>

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 13:01:27 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDD9-6CCVQMsWiCKtxmiF18TD94JANeBew=XQ44uXL_SsQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu" <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
Cc: WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
Heya Kenny!

Below are the resolutions of the issues you raised in this thread.

Issue 12: cycle() and values that have commas
Closed as OutOfScope pending WG resolution - we're proposing to punt
cycle() to the next level so we can address these and other issues
with cycle() more properly.

Issue 21: attr() and cycle() must be "valid where they are placed",
but can resolve as multiple types
Closed as Accepted - the spec now says that an attr() is valid only
if, when "the attr() expression is not the sole component value of a
property, the <fallback> matches the attr()'s type".  In other words,
if a property's value is just a single attr(), the fallback can have
whatever type.  If a property's value is an attr() along with other
things, the fallback must match the attr()'s declared type.  This
avoids your issue of combinatorial explosion of possible
interpretations, all of which must be checked for validity.

Please let us know if these are acceptable!

~TJ
Received on Monday, 23 April 2012 20:02:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:52 GMT