- From: Amelia Bellamy-Royds via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 17:22:01 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Wrt `::letter-only`, would be nice to pick a word that worked with `::marker`, if that's in fact the direction we want to go in eventually. Either way, I'd drop `-only`.
Yes, definitely, and one of the reasons I emphasized that the name needed work.
Maybe `::value`? So `::first-letter::value` would match the letter itself, while `::marker::value` would match the value of the counter(s). That works for separating out any [prefix/suffix defined by an `@counter` rule](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-counter-styles-3/#counter-style-prefix), separators inserted by [`counters()` function](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-lists-3/#funcdef-counters). But… it's a little strange if you want to handle markers set directly via the `content` property. For `::marker { content: "(" counter(n) ")"; }`, the non-counter strings are equivalent to prefix/suffix punctuation. But for `::marker { content: "→"; }`, the string is the marker value.
So… maybe it would be best to focus on a name for the current use case & deal with the counter use case, if need be, with a more explicit name.
--
GitHub Notification of comment by AmeliaBR
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2040#issuecomment-673006058 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 12 August 2020 17:22:03 UTC