- From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 14:03:28 +0100
- To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Le 09/11/10 11:16, Håkon Wium Lie a écrit :
> You could make similar arguments about shorthand properties.
>
> Comparing these:
>
> @media all and (color) { ... }
> @media all and (min-color: 1) { ... }
>
> I'd say the first is comprehensible, while the second is not.
I still dislike very much the fact a feature can have a value and
be value-less too. I would accept easily a value-less 'color' feature
and a 'bits-per-color-component' feature having always a value.
Same changes for other value-less properties.
From my editor implementor's perspective, having features that accept
a value AND can be value-less is a problem for content editors. Sorry
to discover that so late, I needed an implementation in an editor to
see it.
> And the spec is in CR.
>
> Therefore, I would be reluctant to make changes at this stage.
With my co-chair hat off and my AC hat on, I don't care about the
spec's status. I want the spec to be good, consistent, implementable
and authorable outside of vi and emacs. If that goal requires to go
back to a lower stage on the REC track, so be it.
</Daniel>
Received on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 13:04:00 UTC