W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2009

Re: [CSS3] Some thoughts about functions, notation and gradient().

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 19:59:55 -0500
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0908201759r6646711ao7bc3af83dd64f510@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Andrew
Fedoniouk<news@terrainformatica.com> wrote:
> Say you have set of existing styles that you carefully crafted in years. And
> now you've got UA that started to support, say, background-size.
> It is just enough for someone or even for you to change background-size in
> default style and you will need to update bunch of other rules to suppress
> it.
> Having function that allow you to define the set as a whole plus existing
> mechanism allowing to redefine particular attribute will give you more
> choices
> of making better and stable designs.

You do know that all shorthand properties reset unspecified properties
to their default value, right?

A new type of background property that gets added to the shorthand
won't have any effect on your older code.

Received on Friday, 21 August 2009 01:00:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:07:38 UTC