- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 03:42:09 +0000
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
[L. David Baron:] > > On Monday 2011-10-31 12:06 -0700, fantasai wrote: > > And would that be more, less, or equally useful as a value that simply > > means ''initial''/''inherit'' (depending on whether the property > inherits by default)? > > That idea was proposed by dbaron here: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2002OctDec/0191.html > > For the record, that message was: > > # From: L. David Baron <dbaron@fas.harvard.edu> # Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 > 17:15:55 -0400 # To: w3c-css-wg@w3.org # Message-ID: > <20021020171555.A22654@is01.fas.harvard.edu> > # > # Would it be useful to have a 'default' value, defined to be equivalent # > to 'inherit' for properties that are inherited by default and equivalent # > to 'initial' for properties that are not inherited by default? This # > might be easier for authors to use than 'initial' and 'inherit' since it # > wouldn't require thinking about whether a property is inherited by # > default or not (which isn't obvious for some properties, such as # text- > decoration and visibility). > # > # -David > # > # -- > # L. David Baron <URL: http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/ > > > -David > David's approach seems both useful and friendlier to the general author population.
Received on Tuesday, 1 November 2011 03:42:53 UTC