W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2013

Re: [cssom][css-cascade] Access to specified or cascaded values in OM?

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 12:46:31 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDD+5gG9rrQbPyriRnSJHktL_6kyUkuSVW4O9MxC0DRFHg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 3:30 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
>> One further issue is what
>> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/cssom/#getstyleutils should specify access
>> to.
>>
>> Do authors want access to cascaded values (sometimes empty, and with
>> 'initial' and 'inherit' as they are) or specified values (with
>> 'initial' and 'inherit' resolved and any empty values replaced with
>> the inherited or initial value)?  I don't recall the use cases here
>> to recall which is useful (one, both, or neither).
>
> I've posted a call for opinions on my blog: http://www.xanthir.com/b4Qi0

I got a pretty decent number of quality comments on my blog post, and
they were unanimous - they'd prefer what the Cascade draft now calls
"cascaded style", where initial/inherit still show up, and if nothing
set a given property on the element, it returns null.  It seems to be
more useful for polyfilling purposes (for example, it would let a
library tell the difference between a custom property being set on the
element and it just inheriting a value from an ancestor).

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 19:47:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 3 July 2013 19:47:20 UTC