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

Re: [cssom] .style on CSSFontFaceRule and CSSPageRule should probably not be CSSStyleDeclarations as that interface is currently defined

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 12:15:01 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDA1bJt1LceSQcLAHQfQKXrfdtJvNNV4YeDu8S73zAfjkg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> On 8/21/12 2:21 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> Actually, that seems about right.  Having a common Declaration
>> interface for the things that use that seems useful, and then
>> subclassing the interface for each individual use lets you specialize
>> the list of exposed properties.
>
> If we want a common Declaration interface, should it have
> getPropertyPriority on it?  Should it have a "cssText"?  Should it even talk
> about "property"?   Should it have a setProperty that takes a priority
> argument?
>
> I'm OK with the answer being "yes" to all of those, for backwards compat
> reasons, but it seems like having to define the property priority stuff
> behavior for various consumers like font-face is a bit annoying.

Eh, the priority stuff can just no-op by default, and have a real
meaning on the style='' one.

However, if it's possible to move the style attribute toward returning
a sub-interface, then we should be able to just move all of those to
the sub-interface as well, and define priority-less versions for the
super-interface, since most extensions will be at-rules with
descriptors that have no concept of priority.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2012 19:15:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:58 GMT