- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 15:32:18 -0400
- To: Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
On 9/1/10 3:26 PM, Lea Verou wrote: >> The second argument (which is optional but must be present if the >> third argument is present) is a <type> and tells the UA how to >> interpret the attribute value. It may be one of the values from the >> list below. > (from http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-values/#ltattrgt) Ah. That sounds unfortunately slow, but ok. > So what I'm saying is that if the type of the attribute as defined in > the markup spec (or if it's not defined at all) is "string", and attr() > is called on it without a 2nd parameter, then it could either be > considered a parse error (which would be more consistent with how attr() > is currently proposed) or interpreted as a number, if possible (which is > more useful). With some sort of fallback for values that can't be interpreted as numbers? > Am I making sense now? Yes, but I'm not sure what the use cases are, honestly... -Boris
Received on Wednesday, 1 September 2010 19:32:59 UTC