- From: Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
- Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 04:27:49 +0800
- 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. Cheers, Kenny
Received on Monday, 23 April 2012 20:28:17 UTC