- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:30:51 +0000
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, CSS WG <www-style@w3.org>
> From: Anne van Kesteren [mailto:annevk@opera.com] > On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 19:03:04 +0100, Sylvain Galineau > <sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote: > > The first set of properties has no resolved value. I assume the > implied > > rule is that shorthands don't get resolved ? > > That was the idea, but I think what dbaron proposed is better. I.e. > that > we return something for shorthand properties as well as more properties > may evolve into being shorthand properties in the future. I agree this seems better, and likely least surprising to the caller. I was mostly wondering whether the 'shorthandedness' of the properties was the only criteria in this list. > Right, it is the computed value as defined by CSS 2.1. Maybe I should > simplify the introduction by stating that for some properties it does > something different for historical reasons, without trying to go into > detail. Right. I don't mean to be slow but I want to make sure I got it right. As I read it the spec says getComputedStyle() shall return one of: 1. Nothing (modulo earlier comment) 2. The property's used value 3. the property's computed value as defined by CSS2.1 Thus all the properties that fall in #2 are the ones who have historically diverged from CSS2.1 's definition of computed value, right ? > Do you mean the serialization of each value? That I have yet to define. > I > also should make it more clear that the style declaration block > returned > needs to have the resolved value for each property the user agent > supports > and that if the element is removed from the DOM all properties return > the > empty string. This is the clarification I had in mind.
Received on Friday, 12 February 2010 20:31:27 UTC