- From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 12:11:48 -0700
- To: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Sep 27, 2013, at 8:23 PM, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I've received very consistent feedback that the section on basic shape
> syntax is too difficult to interpret. So I've substituted the previous
> definitions for prose descriptions:
>
> This:
>
> rectangle([<length>|<percentage>][, [<length>|<percentage>]]{3,5})
>
> Becomes this:
>
> rectangle() takes either four or six arguments of <length> or <percentage>
>
>
> The prose also refers now to the rules for functional notation from Values
> and Units [1], which actually makes the definition more precise (what was
> in the draft before did not account for optional whitespace within the
> parentheses).
That seems quite unusual. Why not do both. The official CSS property definition and the prose text? I for instance like to read the grammar defined by CSS Values and Units better.
Greetings,
Dirk
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alan
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-values/#functional-notation
>
>
Received on Friday, 27 September 2013 19:12:14 UTC