- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 16:54:31 -0700
- To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote: > · ‘initial’ was not a keyword in CSS2.1. Was it a forward-looking > extension? Is it still relevant? 'initial' has been useful for me in the past. > · How normative is the CSS2.1 text? Does it actually mean that the > value is invalid, or is it just discouraged? It uses 'must', so it's a normative requirement. Unfortunately, it appears to be author conformance criteria, as there is nothing specifying what implementations should do if authors *do* specify a counter with that name. (The Lists module *does* specify this as implementation conformance, by stating that it makes the @counter-style invalid if you use one of the reserved names. > · Should ‘initial’ also be invalid for flow names, in addition to > ‘none’ and ‘inherit’? Yes. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 15 June 2011 23:55:18 UTC