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

Re: [css-hierarchies] HTML style attribute

From: Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 08:25:19 +0800
Message-ID: <4F55596F.1090506@csail.mit.edu>
To: François REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>
CC: WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
(12/03/03 22:07), François REMY wrote:
> My proposals to update the [2] working draft are :
> (1) to normatively require to use "ruleitem" instead of "declaration"
> for browsers conforming to [1].
> (2) to redefine "declaration" directly in the [1] proposal, if it's
> possible.

What you are asking here is a lot broader than your original examples
and there are unanswered questions in your proposal. In particular,

(1) Should style="&::before {}" apply to the corresponding pseudo element?

(2) Should style="& * {}" apply to descendant elements?

(3) If the answer to any of the above questions "yes", how should
cascading works?

Without these questions answered, it makes no sense to extend just the
syntax of the @style attribute to its full range without specifying how
the extended semantics is. It might actually be better if we just extend
the declaration production to include '&' followed by a pseudo-class,
and this, in your words, is yet a disconnected piece of syntax, although
its semantics is well-defined.

That is, I don't see why it is a good thing to have the syntax
automatically extended without the meaning given.

(12/03/05 0:15), François REMY wrote:
> I know the HTML5 specification is out of the scope of this working
> group, but the faulty specification is not the HTML5 one but
> CSS-STYLE-ATTR [2]. That one is under responsability of the CSS WG. I
> would like to have that specification updated to reflect the reality:
> the style attribute should behave like the body a CSS rule, not like a
> list of property declarations. I hope I was clearer this time.

As you said, there wasn't big difference between to two before CSS
Hierachies was introduced, and it is still not decided whether we really
want to include this new feature in @style.

Also, CSS-STYLE-ATTR is slightly more detailed because it asks UA to
"use the same forward-compatible parsing rules that apply to parsing
declaration block contents in a normal CSS style sheet", and would
arguably handle CSS Hierarchy already as long as "parsing declaration
block contents" is extended by that spec, albeit the grammar might imply
the other way around. The grammar, as far as I can tell, isn't too
useful anyway because it doesn't say how error handling should happen.



Cheers,
Kenny
Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2012 00:25:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 03:48:51 GMT