- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:48:30 -0700
- To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- CC: Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>, www-font <www-font@w3.org>
Martin J. Dürst wrote: > Hello Steve, others, > > On 2009/10/29 13:27, Stephen Zilles wrote: > >> So, one approach would be to make the "=number" part optional. If >> omitted, the feature would simply be toggled. Why "toggled" you ask. >> Because it makes sense for some of the features to be, by default, >> enabled. And, it is also necessary to be able to turn off a feature. >> If an author were in doubt about the state of a feature (whether >> enabled or disabled), then the author could always use the "=number" >> form of the setting to set it to an explicit state. > > I'm afraid that toggled would lead to tons of confusion when used with > CSS cascading features. I don't know of any CSS features that are > toggled, for good reasons I think. Right. We don't have toggles. We do have presence=ON, absence=OFF for many things. However, it seems we're dealing with a tri-state here, not a boolean: ON, OFF, and DEFAULT. ~fantasai
Received on Friday, 30 October 2009 19:15:05 UTC