W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > November 2017

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-logical-1] [css-cascade-3] The all longhand probably shouldn't set logical properties.

From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2017 17:20:43 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-342556321-1510075242-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
The Working Group just discussed `logical/physical property cascade and the .style API`, and agreed to the following resolutions:

* `RESOLVED: Make it so that setters to the .style api are appended rather than put in place`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;gregwhitworth> Topic: logical/physical property cascade and the .style API<br>
&lt;astearns> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1898<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: someone pointed out that there are problems with the way logical properties are defined when trying to use the DOM APIs<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: they get resolved in the normal order and then go through the cascade and we deal with the physical and logical based on ordering and writing mode<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: when you set a property it gets appended to the list of properties in the style attribute<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: and if you set one that's already there it just replaces it<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: so this can cause it to be out of sync with what would happen in the cascade<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: the proposal is to amend the CSSOM that if something is there it is always appended<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: related to this<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: we had an issue with !important and we resolved to append to make this work<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> dbaron: I'm happy to make that change<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> dbaron: we had a long discussion and resolved the opposite way<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> dbaron: a setter should append<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> dbaron: at the time implementations were inconsistent due to optimizations<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> dbaron: for existing properties in the fast path they would replace and others they would append<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> dbaron: one question, would having to do that mess up optimizations?<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: when we discussed it internally we were fine making the change<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> dbaron: I found the minutes from 2013 but I'm looking for the other one<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> astearns: so I'm clear, the suggestion to append or remove and then append?<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: those are equivelant<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> dbaron: I think it may turn out that it's not equivelant in the future<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: we should figure out which one we want, it will need to have a note to determine this<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> dholbert: you could inspect the style attr and determine that way<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: the current model limits to only one<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> astearns: I'm hearing two engines happy to change<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> astearns: any compat concerns?<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> dbaron: possibly<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> astearns: the compat issue would be limited to logical props shorthands?<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: no<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> fantasai: it would only affect people looking at .style expecting a particular order<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> fantasai: which doesn't make much sense, so it's probably not very common<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> florian: I doubt it's common<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> Rossen: tools and editors might be doing this<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: I'd be surprised if the editor was reading the style and writing to .style<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> Rossen: they could<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> astearns: The proposed resolution is to change CSSOM to append values via the .style API and add a note<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: yeah, and try to figure that out in the future<br>
&lt;dbaron> Things I found were https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Sep/0469.html and https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Oct/0007.html but I think there was further followup after the latter<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> astearns: any other opinions? objections?<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> RESOLVED<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> RESOLVED: Make it so that setters to the .style api are appended rather than put in place<br>

GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1898#issuecomment-342556321 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 7 November 2017 17:20:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 7 November 2017 17:20:47 UTC