- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 22:19:50 +0000
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
> From: L. David Baron [mailto:dbaron@dbaron.org] > Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 3:07 PM > To: Tab Atkins Jr. > Cc: Sylvain Galineau; Simon Fraser; www-style list > Subject: Re: [css3-transitions] shorthand/longhand handling in > transition property > > On Monday 2010-10-25 14:56 -0700, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > > I don't understand. Dbaron is saying that the current spec text > > suggests (b). I am supporting the same thing that dbaron appears to > > be. > > Well, the current spec text says (a) and (b) do the same thing, so > I'm not sure that comparing them is useful; Right. My example is meant to be a logical representation of what happens. In the b) case it's meant to convey that two separate transitions are running on border-right-width instead of the one resolved by the duplicate rule. > if you want to think of > the processing model in terms of expansion and conversion of > property values (which is probably not the best idea), you go > through both stages: the shorthand expands to all four of its > subproperties (so it's like b), but then one of those subproperties > is ignored (so it's like a) because it's overridden by a later > occurrence. Yes. A) is the result of collapsing the two duplicates in b). The spec seems pretty clear but given that existiing implementations appeared to disagree I thought it was worth clarifying. An example involving a shorthand/ longhand pair may be helpful here.
Received on Monday, 25 October 2010 22:20:29 UTC