- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 15:40:17 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The big point is, the entire reason we're adding `none` as a keyword is because authors can already get the "missing component" behavior for *any* component, per spec, by abusing relative color syntax. Since the *transition* behavior of missing components seems useful (required for reasonable hue transitions, but meaningfully useful for other components), it seems bad to require authors to use weird hacks to get them, so `none` lets authors do it in a non-hacky way. This means that limiting `none` in any way defeats the whole point of adding it. Any and all usage of `none` outside of transitions is an authoring mistake, but not one we can meaningfully *prevent* without a decent bit of complexity. So we're erring on the side of "simple but stupid" instead, hoping that the slightly-unreasonable behavior (and generally, longer spelling than just using a 0 component) will keep authors from reaching for it on purpose. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6107#issuecomment-940140692 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 11 October 2021 15:40:19 UTC