- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:01:42 -0500
- To: www-style@w3.org
I noticed that Dean and I both added text to address the issue about specifying handling of shorthand properties, but we did so in different and contradictory ways. In http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-transitions/#the-transition-property-property- I added: # If one of the identifiers listed is a shorthand property, # implementations must start transitions for any of its longhand # sub-properties that are animatable, using the duration, delay, # and timing function at the index corresponding to the # shorthand. and in http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-transitions/#animation-of-property-types- Dean added: # a shorthand property: If all the parts of a shorthand can be # animated, then interpolation is performed as if each property # was individually specified. The difference is that Dean's text requires all of the parts to be animatable whereas mine says that any parts that are animatable should be animated even if others are not. I prefer my proposal because it is more forwards-compatible: if the working group turns an existing animatable property (say, 'text-indent') into a shorthand with some components that are not animatable (say, to allow 'text-indent: 5em hanging'), my proposal would not break existing content. -David -- L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ Mozilla Corporation http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Sunday, 27 December 2009 02:02:11 UTC