- 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