- From: Ryan Reno via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2023 20:24:30 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
rreno has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts: == [css-images] image-set: should we serialize options with unsupported type? == In the [serialization section](https://w3c.github.io/csswg-drafts/css-images-4/#serialization) of css-images-4 it says: >To serialize any function defined in this module, serialize it per its individual grammar, in the order its grammar is written in, **omitting components when possible without changing the meaning**, ... (emphasis mine) I read that as omit unsupported types since the meaning of the image-set is unchanged from the perspective of the engine. That is, if an unsupported image type were left out of the image-set the result would be unchanged. Is that a good reading? Should the prose be explicit for this case? Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8495 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 24 February 2023 20:24:32 UTC