W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2014

Re: [css-namespaces] feedback

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 12:02:31 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDA6GZqiigMNk3t_0vWq-=krdsr3SewWtW_mQD4=UpR-6w@mail.gmail.com>
To: commandline@telenet.be
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Just to make sure, it looks like this email has nothing to do with the
CSS Namespaces spec, right?

On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 8:17 AM,  <commandline@telenet.be> wrote:
> Dear,
>
> Thank's for an upgrade to css which we welcome. However, there's something
> which keeps on attracting my attention. Namely the lack of
> modularity-of-designs.
>
> I hope this comment can be seen as a contribution and just maybe as a start
> of a possibly interesting phase in the development of css.
>
> For example, why does the inherit property not enable to extend it with {
> font-size: inherit+1em; } for example ?

When used in font-size, "1em" *is* the inherited value; the "em" unit
corresponds to the value of 'font-size' on the parent.

This doesn't work for every property, of course, but this might get
addressed in the future, when CSS Custom Properties adds a
parent-var() function - I'm pretty sure it's fine to look up the value
of any property on your parent, without circularity issues.

> Or  like {  font-all : inherit;
> font-variant : small-caps; }

The 'font-all' property already exists - it's the 'font' shorthand.

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2014 16:03:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:25 UTC