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

Re: [css3-values] RE: CSSStyleDeclaration#length and shorthands.

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 16:20:38 -0500
Message-ID: <4F29ACA6.5090708@mit.edu>
To: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
CC: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 2/1/12 4:04 PM, Brian Manthos wrote:
> Example A
>
> <div style=”border: red dashed 1px;”>
>
> Example B
>
> <div style=”border-color: red; border-style: solid; border-width: 2px;”>
>
> JavaScript then queries…
>
> 1.document.getElementsByTagName(‘div’)[0].style.border
>
> 2.document.getElementsByTagName(‘div’)[0].style.border-color
>
> I would argue that the answers should be…
>
> A1 “red dashed 1px”
>
> A2 “red”
>
> B1 “red dashed 1px”
>
> B2 “red”

Yes (modulo 1px vs 2px and solid vs dashed and borderColor vs border-color).

> My impression is that some would argue the answers should be…
>
> A1 “red dashed 1px”
>
> A2 “”
>
> B1 “”
>
> B2 “red”

A2="" is not web-compatible, I'm fairly certain.

B1="" may be web-compatible maybe, but I somewhat doubt it.  Do any UAs 
have the B1="" behavior?  In any case, it seems undesirable.

But that has nothing to do with length and item() behavior, a priori. 
There are plenty of other cases where a property exists but is not 
reflected in length/item (e.g all nodelists have such properties, JS 
arrays have properties not reflected in the length, etc).

> As I mentioned previously, for cssText I understood the goal to be more
> minimalistic/concise and thus the coalescing makes sense.

Yes.

-Boris
Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2012 21:21:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:50 GMT