- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:08:29 -0500
- To: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 1/31/12 3:03 PM, Brian Manthos wrote: > Boris: >> What if the style were: >> <span style="border: 7px dashed red; border-right-color: green"> >> What should happen then? > > Include > - border-top-width, border-right-width, border-bottom-width, border-left-width > - border-top-style, border-right-style, border-bottom-style, border-left-style > - border-top-color, border-right-color, border-bottom-color, border-left-color > - border-width > - border-style > > Exclude (not constructible) > - border-color > - border My point is that you want to include shorthands here then: 1) The spec has to define, in great detail, exactly what is "constructible". 2) Which things appear in the list will change if longhand syntax changes. Right? >> If the style were: >> <div style="border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 2px; >> border-bottom-width: 3px; border-left-width: 4px"> > > Include > - border-top-width, border-right-width, border-bottom-width, border-left-width > - border-width OK. I see the mental model now, but why is it desirable? It sure makes length computation slow (or mutation of the declaration; your pick). -Boris
Received on Tuesday, 31 January 2012 20:08:58 UTC