- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 14:29:24 -0400
- To: "Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu" <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
- CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
On 04/30/2012 02:41 AM, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote: > (12/04/30 13:48), Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu >> <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu> wrote: >>> (12/04/27 8:31), Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >>> Well, "functionally equivalent after parsing" is of course better than a >>> vague equal sign but it's still pretty underspecified. It might also not >>> be what we want, for two reasons: >>> >>> 1) cycle() compares the inherited value to the arguments so that's a >>> comparison of computed values. That's is it should at least be >>> "functionally equivalent after parsed and computed". >>> >>> 2) there are cases that are "functional equivalent" but potentially hard >>> to tell programatically, such as: >>> >>> a. "url(http://www.example.com/)" vs. "image(http://www.example.com/)". >>> b. "image(black)" vs. "linear-gradient(0deg, black, black)" >> >> Neither of those are equivalent in the way I was thinking. I was just >> thinking "same tokens, and same order unless the difference in order >> is unimportant". >> >> Actually, since computed values shouldn't *have* order unless it's >> important (for example, the 'flex' function is just "two numbers, and >> a length or keyword"), comparison of the abstract notion of computed >> values should be fine. That allows "5px 10px" and "top 10px left 5px" >> to be "the same" potentially. > > Please no "abstract notion"! > >> However, I wouldn't be too put out if we just went for the "same >> tokens, and same order if important" definition. It's simple. > > Which means that a hash color is different from rgb()? I doubt this is > implementable. > > In any case, I believe this question has to be deferred to CSSOM. The cycle() (now toggle()) function is already defined to operate on the the computed value, which is well-defined and already abstract enough for our purposes. The CSSWG therefore closed this issue as invalid. Let me know if there's a problem with this. ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 16 July 2012 18:30:02 UTC