- From: fantasai <fantasai@escape.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 02:51:59 -0500
- To: www-style@w3.org
fantasai wrote: > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-css3-text-20021024/#white-space-props : > | ignore | preserve | ignore-if-before-linefeed | > | ignore-if-after-linefeed | ignore-if-surrounding-linefeed > > What's with all the 'if's? This is code here, not English. > It should be clearly expressed, but it does not have to > make a sentence. Clear /and/ concise, please. Been thinking, it would be also better to change ignore-if-surrounding-linefeed -> ignore-around-linefeed Shorter, reads better, avoids conjugation. I really don't like the distinction between "white-space" (which excludes newlines) and "all-space" (which doesn't), since linefeeds and the like are generally considered white-space. It's best, IMO, to avoid redefining concepts when defining CSS properties. ... Using "collapse" rather than "treatment" for the collapsing properties leads to a more precise property name. It also lets one shorten the names while preserving semantics. The three white-space control properties could thus be combined into two: linefeed-treatment: ignore | preserve | space | zero-width | no-double As described by Christoph Päper. space-collapse: all | none | before-linefeed | after-linefeed | around-linefeed | no-char all - collapse all white-space except preserved linefeeds none - preserve all white-space not affected by linefeed-treatment before-linefeed - discard white-space before preserved linefeeds after-linefeed - discard white-space after preserved linefeeds around-linefeed - discard white-space before and after preserved linefeeds no-char - discard all white-space except preserved line feeds (I also recommend s/linefeed/newline/g) As for compatibility with XSL--I think usability is more important. Shorter names are easier to remember, and removing repetitive fluff makes code easer to scan for its real meaning. If CSS can learn from XSL's mistakes, so much the better for us all. ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 16 December 2002 02:51:19 UTC