Re: CSS shorthand reference

Yay for the oxford comma :)

Both the advanced selectors and shorthand articles are very nice and
concise, very easy and quick to read, which is the point.

Concerning the shorthand article:
- the background-attachment is missing from the background shorthand
property, if I'm not mistaken it's the last slot (after the positioning)
and is either fixed or scroll
- I am not certain about that, but would a small note about gradients
benefit novice users that have seen gradients only in the context of the
shorthad? I am talking about few words that explain that gradients are the
same as background-image and take the same position in the shorthand
- the last sentence in the section on color is rather peculiar :)


Alexander Futekov


On 6 December 2011 16:10, Chris Mills <cmills@opera.com> wrote:

>
> On 6 Dec 2011, at 13:32, Richard D. Worth wrote:
>
> > Looking good. I fixed a few minor typos, added some oxford commas, made
> the indentation in code samples consistent, and made the headings
> consistent (some had 'shorthand' others did not, I opted for not).
>
> Cheers Richard.
>
> I've filled in the blanks now.
>
> >
> > Wasn't sure how to fix wording on "rarely want to go this granular, for
> will probably use simply"
>
> ah yes, that was a bit horrible. Fixed it ;-)
>
> >
> > Also, can we standardize on spelling it "color" instead of "colour" as
> it's consistent with the property in the specs?
>
> yes. and serial commas ;-)
>
> I have added points about these to the style guide.
>