- From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 13:29:44 -0400
- To: "Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu" <kennyluck@w3.org>
- Cc: WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 6:03 PM, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kennyluck@w3.org> wrote: > These properties used to be in CSS3 Text[1]. I think the reason why they > were removed is as you said, lack of use cases. > > (This is similar to an early request to have longhand property for > 'transform', by the way. ISSUE-177[2]) Hmm, I see. > Fake CSS properties seem to be rather confusing. Is reusing the > add(token) and remove(token) bits of DOMTokenList[3] a feasible approach? Currently my algorithm <http://aryeh.name/gitweb.cgi?p=editcommands;a=blob_plain;f=editcommands.html;hb=HEAD> has lots of places where it says something to the effect of "set CSS property X to value Y", where X and Y differ based on the style we're applying. Clearly I don't want to say "set text-decoration to 'underline'", because that will unset other properties too. So if the CSS properties don't let me set things orthogonally, I have to rewrite it in terms of made-up CSS properties and define my own algorithm for setting and getting them, which for my made-up underline property will involve processing the text-decoration property. Or I could rephrase things to not be in terms of CSS properties at all. But this is about as low-priority use-case as you can get, since spec writers' convenience is least important in the scheme of things (other than theoretical purity). So if there's no author demand, I guess there's no justification for the feature.
Received on Sunday, 27 March 2011 17:30:38 UTC