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

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

From: Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 04:27:49 +0800
Message-ID: <4F95BB45.8040002@csail.mit.edu>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
(12/04/24 4:01), Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> 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.

Does this mean that <fallback> for attr() can contain commas? I have no
problem with this but I should warn that something like "attr(x, 50%,
50%)" prevents us from having a third argument in the future (which I
don't consider a big problem), not to mention that it is a big ugly.

Assuming the above interpretation of the current draft (i.e. attr() can
contain commas), I am satisfied with this as long as you editors are
satisfied, but If the idea is to make the interpreation ambiguous at
this level, I would like to request an explicit "undefined" about
<fallback> in this regard.

Received on Monday, 23 April 2012 20:28:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:57 UTC