- 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