- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:07:41 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
- Message-ID: <20050722170741.GA1178@ridley.dbaron.org>
On Friday 2005-07-22 10:58 +0100, Geoff Soutter wrote: > On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 11:58 -0500, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > Geoff Soutter wrote: > > > What exactly is meant by a "later 'counter-reset' on the same element"? > > > > p { counter-reset: mycounter 1 mycounter 2 mycounter; } > > > > That has three counter-resets on the same element for the same counter; the > > scope of the reset to 1 does not include nodes that are in the scope of the > > reset to 2; the scope of the reset to 2 does not include nodes that are in the > > scope of the reset to 0. > > OK, I think I understand what the spec means re later counter resets. > > I am not exactly an expert on this subject, but it seems to me redundant > to defining scopes for all the references to the same counter within a > single counter-reset when only the last one has an external effect. > > Would it not be better to wield Occam's Razor on the earlier ones? Why have a separate rule when the same rule that applies to counter-resets on siblings works too? (Also note that for counter-increment, the two rules are different, and this keeps counter-reset and counter-increment consistent.) -David -- L. David Baron <URL: http://dbaron.org/ > Technical Lead, Layout & CSS, The Mozilla Foundation
Received on Friday, 22 July 2005 17:08:05 UTC