- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:17:30 -0500
On 2/10/12 11:23 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: > On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Boris Zbarsky<bzbarsky at mit.edu> wrote: >> I agree that having the list for lengths reduces the scope of the problem >> somewhat. But the color quirk means that any shorthand that includes colors >> will run into ambiguity issues if any keywords for any subproperty only use >> letters in the range a-f. I _think_ we can't hit that case now, but going >> forward that will either place a restriction on keyword values or we'll need >> to define how to resolve the ambiguity somehow. >> >> Even for lengths, if we ever add any new subproperties to border, say, that >> happen to take numbers we would run into trouble. I'd rather not >> overconstrain future development of CSS by how we define quirks behavior. > > Why not just say that these quirks only apply to existing syntaxes, > not new ones? Simon's proposal does that, but it's not good enough to avoid all the problems. For example, border-bottom-width is in the list of properties that has the quirk apply to it, as is border-bottom. If we add a border-bottom-count property for some sort of multiple border setup and allow setting it via border-bottom, then you suddenly have a parsing ambiguity for border-bottom, right? -Boris
Received on Friday, 10 February 2012 09:17:30 UTC