- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 16:41:23 -0700
- To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
On 8/21/12 1:08 PM, Glenn Adams wrote: > I would recommend against this approach (having a CSS2Properties that > inherits from CSSStyleDeclaration). Instead, I would suggest we make use > of one or more partial interfaces to express the additional named > property IDL attributes. That fails the "we don't want to expose all these things on the font-face descriptor 'declaration'" criterion, doesn't it? > One possible reason to prefer a prose description is the need to have a > spec that accommodates future named property additions. Alternatively, > we could freeze the set of named properties (e.g., to only some or all > of what was defined in CSS2Properties), and require other properties to > be accessed via getPropertyValue etc. There's nothing wrong with adding more partial interfaces if more properties are added if we want. The point is that we don't really want an attribute called "display" on the thing that hangs off font-face rules. At least I don't want it there... -Boris
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2012 23:41:53 UTC