W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2010

Re: Proposal for CSS3.5

From: Biju <bijumaillist@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 22:54:24 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTikHWvs4NQOQ=ooU_9e9JfiCoWoGa3+5vgwU2woP@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-style@w3.org
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Matthew Ayres
<solar.granulation@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ..twoClass { background-image: , url(other.png), ; }
>> ....would change the second image only, and keep the other two from
>> whatever they were before in the cascade. Essentially, keeping them as if
> How about if that code sample were changed, for a little more human
> readability, to
> .twoClass  { background-image: inherit, url('other.png'), inherit; }
> so that there is a very clear reference to each inherited value.

what about * instead of word "inherit"

.twoClass  { background-image: *, url('other.png'), *; }

Many times I encountered similar issue with CSS clip
And wish we had some like
img { clip:rect(*,50px,100px,*); }

Other CSS properties with similar needs are border, margin, padding etc.

p {border-width: * 5px 3px *; }

And what about  text-decoration CSS property

On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
> And you also have the "zeroeth" issue that is more familiar to programmers
> and JavaScripters than to general CSS authors.

An English Professor may not be familiar with "zeroeth". But a carpenter,
a tailor, a cobbler, a mechanic all are familiar with "zeroeth", their inch tap
always start with a "0".

By now CSS authors should be familiar with zero as starting value,
as (0,0) the first pixel and RGB color is 0 to 255, not 1 to 256

(As well as many CSS authors are comfortable with hexadecimal too,
 introduce to them when using color attribute )

In a project always the person who code JavaScript is the one do CSS

And I am yet to see a web developer, who is not java or .Net or php
programmer in FIRST place.
those languages to have 0 start index

On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> Right, 1-numbering is probably better, and is more consistent with
> current usage.  (The one place in CSS where you reference elements of
> a list by number is :nth-child and friends, where the first element
> has the index 1.)

from http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/#structural-pseudos

tr:nth-child(2n+1) /* represents every odd row of an HTML table */
tr:nth-child(2n+0) /* represents every even row of an HTML table */
p:nth-child(4n+1) { color: navy; }
p:nth-child(4n+2) { color: green; }

the important thing here is the "nth", where value of "n" starts with n=0

So all the place in CSS we see things start with 0.

Important point here we dont want index NOTATION in JavaScript and CSS
do in two different ways.

(I started with FORTRAN there index start with 1,
when I started using Machine Code at first it was confusing  to see
index start with 0,
but later I got used to it when I under stood the reason behind it.
I assume others will also learn to adjust to it )

Received on Saturday, 4 September 2010 02:54:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:49:47 UTC