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

Re: [cssom] serialization order of components of shorthand properties

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:10:43 -0600
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+foDP6VFh37C9sobbKVCf++z19UAdTUEeGjULmYHtKJCw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Cc: W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 1:40 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:

> On Tuesday 2012-07-17 13:08 -0600, Glenn Adams wrote:
> > OK, the above all sounds reasonable. However, from a practical
> perspective,
> > we would need to do one of the following:
> >
> > (1) go back and add such "Canonical Order" lines to the CSS2.1 spec (via
> > errata);
> > (2) define a new spec which does only this, i.e., define Canonical
> Ordering
> > for each property; or
> > (3) include such normative definitions in CSSOM itself;
>
> We've already started adding Canonical Order lines to a number of
> modules; it's part of the module template.
>
> We don't necessarily need to do any of these immediately to address
> the properties that aren't yet covered; it would just mean that
> property serialization order for some properties isn't yet defined.
> But as we have the time to do the research, I think my preference
> would either be for (2) above or for a wiki that would eventually
> get included in appropriate modules once it was complete.


Yes, I was thinking (2) was preferable as well. As a start in that
direction, I will draft a new CSSOM related module, let's call it
cssom-canonical-order. Since this is mostly a CSSOM related behavior in the
first place, it makes sense (IMO) to group it thus. WDYT?
Received on Tuesday, 17 July 2012 20:11:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:56 GMT