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

Re: [css3-2d-transforms][css3-images] <position> grammar is duplicated or points to the wrong spec

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:44:17 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDB4Ec_Hk-r6ASWiKdzwMWWUBGzu47cn3sThXHNXF-bdXw@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 5:30 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
>> On 01/24/2012 07:44 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>> "A math expression has a resolved type, which is one of ‘<length>’,
>>> ‘<frequency>’, ‘<angle>’, ‘<time>’, or ‘<number>’. [...] If
>>> percentages are accepted in the context in which the expression is
>>> placed, a PERCENTAGE token has the type of the value that percentages
>>> are relative to; otherwise, a math expression containing percentages
>>> is invalid."
>>
>>
>> The resolved type is only used to determine the validity of calc().
>> It has nothing to do with how calc() is turned into a computed value.
>
> If that's the case, then the spec is currently underdefining what is
> actually returned.  In either case, Gecko's specific treatment of
> %age+length in background-position is not defined in any way by
> anything, and needs to be.

Apparently WebKit's implementation ended up exactly the same as
Gecko's here (handling it as a percentage/length pair, with the same
interpretation).  This makes it even more certain that we should spec
this properly.

~TJ
Received on Monday, 30 January 2012 21:45:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:49 GMT