- From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 22:20:15 -0700
- To: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
- CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Sep 28, 2013, at 7:18 AM, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> wrote:
> On 9/27/13 10:12 PM, "Dirk Schulze" <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sep 28, 2013, at 12:30 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> but I'm OK with adding grammar back in as long as I
>>>> can avoid the misleading {3,5} and unreadable repetitions of
>>>> <length>|<percentage>. If <arg> should not be used as a local
>>>> shorthand,
>>>> what do you recommend? Shall I make a local definition of #{A,B} that
>>>> can
>>>> eventually be added to Values and Units level 4?
>>>
>>> Just make some appropriately-unique named subterm, like
>>> <rectangle-arg> or something.
>>
>> It would be extremely helpful to have a general term for <length> |
>> <percentage> since that combination is used quite a lot across all CSS
>> specifications. Also, Alan's rectangle() is just one function that uses
>> this combination, there is circle(), polygon() and ellipse() too.
>
> I'll just use <shape-arg> for all of them.
That seems reasonable for CSS Shapes but not a solution for CSS in general.
Greetings,
Dirk
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alan
>
Received on Saturday, 28 September 2013 05:20:48 UTC