- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 17:14:55 -0700
- To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> wrote: > On 24/10/11 4:39 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> As far as I can tell, there's not a single downside to using Roland's >> suggestion instead of the current suggested grammar, and a lot of >> upsides. What do others think? > > You introduce a dependency between properties in terms of how they compute. > We don't have that currently, right? Sure we do. That's precisely what the "computed value" stage is *for*. You can't resolve any property using the "em" unit until you've computed the font-size property, etc. Similarly, a property using a variable wouldn't be able to resolve its computed value until the associated property computes. (data-* properties would compute to their specified values, + any variable calls that they themselves make.) ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 25 October 2011 00:15:42 UTC