- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2024 18:54:34 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> I assume this would then extend generally to all substitution functions, so e.g. both var(attr(...)) and attr(var(...)) are valid? Yes, this would be a generic behavior for all arbitrary substitution functions. > Note this implies that you can't just build the full directed dependency graph before resolving var(). For example: Hm, that's certainly a bit more annoying. @andruud, does that alter your opinion at all? I could see us *specifically* requiring `var()`'s property name argument being required to be literal, while otherwise allowing substitution functions to do whatever. (And similarly extend that to any other substitution functions that add dependencies to the graph; I think maybe only inherit() would be affected right now.) But maybe it's fine and we can just do a later check. The *effects* of a dependency cycle don't kick in until resolution time, anyway. > Also counter(var(--foo)) (no idea if this works today). `counter()` isn't an arbitrary substitution function, that should work just fine today. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11144#issuecomment-2455468190 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 4 November 2024 18:54:35 UTC