- From: Emilio Cobos Álvarez via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 11:09:40 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I replied on the bug but: > @emilio I would understand if you reverted to only accepting one value, but reverting to the opposite of the spec says means that we will end up with Web content depending on what you are shipping. I don't think this is a good plan. Either ship something compatible with the spec or object to the spec being incompatible with what you insist on shipping. I'm reverting to what we (and other engines) are shipping, to avoid shipping something that is both incompatible with the spec _and_ with our previous behavior. We've been shipping the shorthand in the x/y form since Firefox 61. If we want to unship that (which I could understand) I can do that, but I definitely would like that to go through the regular path and not getting the change in a beta without any nightly cycle. Also, we should ask the Blink folks to unship their shorthand too in that case. My objection with what the CSSWG seemed to resolve (which both me and David misinterpreted), apart from the ones I've expressed in comments above, is mostly that the WG decided we wanted to change a shorthand to work like no other shorthand currently does (referring to some properties sometimes, and to others other times) after one implementation had already shipped the previously-resolved thing, which is the opposite behavior, and another had already implemented and cleared for shipping the same way. -- GitHub Notification of comment by emilio Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2988#issuecomment-423143782 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2018 11:09:41 UTC