- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 13:01:27 -0700
- To: "Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu" <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
- Cc: WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
Heya Kenny! Below are the resolutions of the issues you raised in this thread. Issue 12: cycle() and values that have commas Closed as OutOfScope pending WG resolution - we're proposing to punt cycle() to the next level so we can address these and other issues with cycle() more properly. Issue 21: attr() and cycle() must be "valid where they are placed", but can resolve as multiple types Closed as Accepted - the spec now says that an attr() is valid only if, when "the attr() expression is not the sole component value of a property, the <fallback> matches the attr()'s type". In other words, if a property's value is just a single attr(), the fallback can have whatever type. If a property's value is an attr() along with other things, the fallback must match the attr()'s declared type. This avoids your issue of combinatorial explosion of possible interpretations, all of which must be checked for validity. Please let us know if these are acceptable! ~TJ
Received on Monday, 23 April 2012 20:02:15 UTC