- From: Amelia Bellamy-Royds via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 17:01:08 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
As an author, I have to say that Florian's argument makes the most sense, even if it means that `-webkit-appearance` will allow different values than `appearance` (which all eventually map to `auto`). The values that are most useful for authors are `none` and "actually, I changed my mind, do whatever you'd normally do for this element" (aka `auto` or `normal`). Being able to say that an arbitrary element should be styled like, e.g., a native checkbox or drop-down list, would _only_ be useful if you could also check and uncheck that checkbox, or expand and collapse that list. But as far as I can tell, there are no properties or attributes that allow you to do that. So if you [use a specific `-webkit-appearance` value on a `<div>`](https://codepen.io/AmeliaBR/pen/JaEedg?editors=1100), you only get a random smattering of the native styles, not a complete recreation of the native widget. If there _are_ specific appearance values that browsers want to make available for styling any arbitrary element, then those should be added. But if a specific value only makes sense on a specific element or pseudo-element, then I don't understand what the web-compat risk is in mapping that value to `auto` in the unprefixed property. -- GitHub Notification of comment by AmeliaBR Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3024#issuecomment-417728751 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 31 August 2018 17:01:09 UTC