- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 00:20:38 -0700
- To: "Eric A. Meyer" <eric@meyerweb.com>
- CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style@w3.org
On 10/28/2010 11:17 AM, Eric A. Meyer wrote: > At 10:58 AM -0700 10/28/10, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > >> It is somewhat inconsistent, but CSS3 Values & Units makes the >> definitive statement that all properties everywhere accept 'inherit' >> and 'initial', and defines what that means. > > Yes, but not many modules reference it, which makes whatever it says > inapplicable in those cases, does it not? And then there's the cases > where properties explicitly define an 'initial' that might be at odds > with the universal 'initial' that Values & Units defines. It's fairly > hard to tell. It also implies that any property that explicitly lists > 'inherit' could be defining something different than the universal > 'inherit'. Maybe they aren't, but do we know? For sure? > I'm still firmly on the side of explicitly listing them on each property > definition rather than relying on a blanket statement located somewhere > other than the property definition. Doing so greatly reduces the chances > of confusion. I would prefer to have each CSS3 module add its own blanket statement the way CSS3 Backgrounds and Borders does [1], but not include the values in their property definitions. The grammar for many CSS3 properties is already fairly complex: grouping the entire thing in an extra set of brackets in order to add "| inherit" just makes it more confusing. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-background/#values ~fantasai
Received on Friday, 29 October 2010 07:21:14 UTC