- From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 17:10:34 +0100
- To: Peter Moulder <peter.moulder@monash.edu>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Also sprach Peter Moulder:
> Let's try a couple of common uses of @counter-style in all three options
> to get a feel for how they differ visually:
>
> @counter-style lower-norwegian {
> type: alphabetic;
> glyphs: 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzæøå';
> }
>
> @counter-style lower-norwegian {
> type: alphabetic;
> glyphs: 'a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z æ ø å';
> }
It's helpful to post syntax examples like these.
Both examples look fine to me. I have a slight preference for the more
compact form (because I like compact forms), but the space-separated
list is also readable and it's more powerful as it allows
multi-character markers.
> @counter-style lower-norwegian {
> type: alphabetic;
> glyphs: 'a' 'b' 'c' 'd' 'e' 'f' 'g' 'h' 'i' 'j' 'k' 'l' 'm' 'n' 'o'
> 'p' 'q' 'r' 's' 't' 'u' 'v' 'w' 'x' 'y' 'z' 'æ' 'ø' 'å';
> }
This, in contrast, is hard to read/write and hard to detect errors in
-- missing one quote mark would be easy to do, and it would have
consequences.
Do we really need the longhand? Why not just have a space-separated
list?
-h&kon
Håkon Wium Lie CTO °þe®ª
howcome@opera.com http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Wednesday, 23 November 2011 16:11:20 UTC