Re: [csswg-drafts] Inconsistency between `@property { syntax }` (quoted) and `attr(type())` (unquoted) (#12353)

> Is there a reason why `type()` can't also take a string, or has it just been overlooked?

`type()` takes `<syntax>` which produces `<syntax-string>` as its alternatives.

  > A [`<syntax-string>`](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-values-5/#typedef-syntax-string) is a [`<string>`](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-values-4/#string-value) whose value successfully [parses](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-syntax-3/#css-parse-something-according-to-a-css-grammar) as a [`<syntax>`](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-values-5/#typedef-syntax), and represents the same value as that `<syntax>` would.

It also takes `*`. I do not think they are any differences between the value ranges accepted in `syntax` and `type()`. I think you can even validate a `syntax` string value by parsing it as a `<syntax>`, instead of [consuming a syntax definition](https://drafts.css-houdini.org/css-properties-values-api-1/#consume-a-syntax-definition).

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by cdoublev
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12353#issuecomment-2981507556 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2025 18:57:57 UTC