- From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2012 15:15:33 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org
- CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
On 02/01/2012 14:59, Anton Prowse wrote: > On 14/10/2011 23:31, fantasai wrote: >> On 10/13/2011 08:13 AM, Øyvind Stenhaug wrote: >>> http://www.w3.org/2011/10/12-css-irc#T16-47-22 >>> >>> "RESOLVED: accept TabAtkins and fantasai's proposal such that inherit >>> turns the specified value into the parent's computed value" >>> >>> I just realized that this doesn't necessarily make any sense for >>> shorthand properties. In fact, most of chapter 6 seems to >>> operate under an unstated assumption that each declaration setting a >>> shorthand has been converted to equivalent declarations >>> for the corresponding longhand properties. >>> >>> There is a sentence about how declaring a shorthand to be !important >>> is equivalent to declaring all of its sub-properties to >>> be !important. Probably there should be similar wording for 'inherit'. >> >> I suggest instead stating that unstated assumption so that this all works >> and we don't have to work out every missing detail. > > Surely this is just a special case of setting /any/ value on a shorthand > property? If it's not clear from 1.4.3 (Shorthand properties)[1] that > the mechanism works like that then I think we should solve that more > general issue instead. ("!important" is different because it's not a > value.) > > The problem that Øyvind raises with regards to the change proposal[2,3] > is part of the wider problem that value assignment on shorthand > properties is not well-defined.[4] The proposal above doesn't solve that > problem even in the case that Øyvind describes. > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/about.html#shorthand > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Oct/0482.html > [3] http://www.w3.org/Style/css2-updates/REC-CSS2-20110607-errata.html > [4] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15384 Sorry, please ignore me; my claim is incorrect, and I do think the behaviour of 'inherit' on shorthands needs clearer treatment. Cheers, Anton Prowse http://dev.moonhenge.net
Received on Monday, 2 January 2012 14:16:03 UTC