- From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 15:43:58 +0100
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Also sprach Tab Atkins Jr.: > > > > - Issue: Do we need predefined lists beyond what CSS2 defines? For example, > > > > do we need 'simple-upper-roman', 'fullwidth-decimal', 'octal', > > > > 'upper-hexadecimal'? Do the people who need octal numbering (there > > > > may be some) really trust CSS to get numbering correct? > > > > > > This is already covered by an issue. (I'll note, though, that 'octal' > > > isn't a very good style to question the correctness of, given that > > > it's completely trivial. > > > > It's trivial to express, but is there a strong use case? We don't want > > to add stuff only because it's easy. When people use octal numbering, > > I believe it's part of the content. That is, when people use octal, > > it's vital for the meaning of the document that the numbering is > > displayed in octal. Thus, we're beyond styling. > > > > But maybe I'm wrong. A few samples in the wild would be helpful to see. > > I'm not opposed to removing some styles. I was just opposed to > removing the entire section because of a few styles. ^_^ I'm using octal as an example. The same arguments can be made for the other types, too. However, I don't want to go through the list; the burden of proof must be on those that want things included in the spec. > > > Better would be some of the non-English > > > alphabetic styles, where I'm counting on information from other people > > > and my own transcription ability to get this right.) > > > > I'm concerned about us not getting enough review. > > Sure. If there is a concern that this will hold up Lists, or that in > an effort to *not* hold up Lists we'll push through without enough > review of the predefined styles, perhaps we could split them out into > a separate spec? Define @counter-style in the Lists spec, but define > the predefined styles in another. Then we won't have to worry about > the two interfering with each other's progress in either direction. Agree, this would allow us to make rapid progress. I also think it's good to publish a set of proposed list-styles. But I'm not conviced it should be a REC-track listing of predefined styles that must be distributed by all UAs. > > > > - Issue: should we replace the numbering systems described in chapter > > > > 11 with spelled-out lists that can be expressed without defining > > > > algorithms? Before deciding, spelled-out lists up to, say 100, should be > > > > added for comparison purposes. > > > > > > Up to 100 isn't really acceptable. While *most* lists are under 100, > > > as they're hand-coded, a significant fraction of the remaining > > > use-cases can get very large, easily going into the thousands. > > > > If so, they can add their own definitions, no? > > > > Could you point to some real-world use cases that are up in the > > thousands? I have no doubt there are some, but it ould be helpful to > > see what they contain. > > In general, or specifically for this type of list? Either, both, anything you have. > > > > - Issue: could W3C host a style sheet with the "predefined" styles in > > > > it? It's easier to correct errors in this style sheet than it is to > > > > change/update deployed browsers. > > > > > > Given the pain caused by software actually following doctype urls that > > > pointed to the w3c, I doubt this would fly (and software is *supposed* > > > to follow <link rel=stylesheet> urls!). ^_^ > > > > Yes, I meant that W3C should host the document and browsers should > > fetch it. This way, errors can easily be fixed. W3C is capable of > > hosting style sheets; the core styles from 1998 are still available: > > > > http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/Core/ > > No browser, I think, would fetch a UA stylesheet from the W3C (or any > website). That's far too fragile. They'd push updates in the usual > way, and include the stylesheet in their own bundled resources. It wouldn't be a UA style sheet, it would be an author style sheet hosted by W3C. It can be included in an author style sheet with (say): @import url(http://www.w3.org/style/css/list-style-types.css); This is similar to the CSS core styles, Google Fonts etc.; UAs are not forced to distribute them, but they are offered online to authors who would like to use them. Cheers, -h&kon Håkon Wium Lie CTO °þe®ª howcome@opera.com http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Monday, 28 November 2011 14:44:42 UTC