- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 06:35:43 +0200
- To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- CC: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, www-style@w3.org
Le 11/04/2012 00:34, Andrew Fedoniouk a écrit : >> But this isn't about inheritance at all: this is about handling of >> > multiple rules applying to the same element (cascading) rather than >> > propagation of computed values from ancestor to descendant >> > (inheritance). > That is debatable of course. > "In classical inheritance ... classes can inherit attributes and behavior..." > src:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inheritance_(computer_science) > > Process of applying multiple matching rules can be seen as runtime or > dynamic or prototype inheritance - final/used style is a set of > properties and values > inherited from all matched rules in order of selector specificity. > > But the term does not matter indeed as soon as concept is clear. Yes, you can argue that what you propose looks like the general concept of inheritance. I think that David’s point was that in CSS, we already have something named inheritance and an 'inherit' keyword, both with very precise meaning and behavior. You proposal is not about *this* inheritance, and the term is already taken. It would be confusing if "counter-increment: inherit" and "counter-increment: !inherit" were both valid but meant something completely different. I think that this proposal addresses a real need, but it needs another term. Regards, -- Simon Sapin
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2012 04:36:16 UTC