- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2018 23:45:12 +0000
- To: public-houdini-archive@w3.org
The Working Group just discussed `Multiple base URLs`. <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <heycam> Topic: Multiple base URLs<br> <astearns> github: https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/767<br> <heycam> github: https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/767<br> <heycam> TabAtkins: there was a question of how should URLs resolve in a typed custom prop<br> <heycam> ... if you giveit an image type, how should you absolutize it<br> <heycam> ... the resolution was to resolve like it would a real property, but relative to the file it's in<br> <fantasai> s/but//<br> <heycam> heycam: so where it was declared<br> <heycam> TabAtkins: yes<br> <fantasai> TabAtkins: As opposed to an untyped property, in which csae the URL gets resolved in the property declaration where it gets substituted in<br> <heycam> ... now on to issue 767<br> <heycam> ... here we have two separate custom props, in two different style sheets<br> <heycam> ... declaring relative URLs. and in a third style sheet, using the two together in a background-image<br> <heycam> ... the question is, how will these resolve according to where the custom prop was declared?<br> <heycam> ... the answer is yes<br> <heycam> astearns: there's a PR in the issue<br> <heycam> iank_: this is Anders in Oslo, working on Blink<br> <heycam> fantasai: seems reasonable to me<br> <heycam> dbaron: even better would be a WPT<br> <heycam> iank_: Anders will definitely add one<br> <heycam> TabAtkins: no resolution needed then<br> <heycam> astearns: should Anders be an editor?<br> <heycam> TabAtkins: he's not in the WG yet<br> <heycam> eae: probably not yet<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/767#issuecomment-401641388 using your GitHub account
Received on Sunday, 1 July 2018 23:45:16 UTC