- From: andruud via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 12:44:37 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
That makes sense to me for `attr(foo px)` (etc). However: - Do we really need `attr(foo string)`, when we could just omit the type? - Introducing `attr(foo value)` also seems unfortunate if it's "basically `*`"). `type(*)` will do here, it's just two chars longer than `value`, and avoids introducing another thing that's very nearly the same as an existing thing. - Alternatively, define `value` to be _exactly_ the same as `type(*)`. > `px`/etc are not a use-case we want to encourage in other places. So this means we're dropping `<number px>`, right? Instead it's just `px`, specific to the `attr()` grammar. -- GitHub Notification of comment by andruud Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11035#issuecomment-2470438733 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 12 November 2024 12:44:38 UTC