- From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:10:43 -0600
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACQ=j+foDP6VFh37C9sobbKVCf++z19UAdTUEeGjULmYHtKJCw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 1:40 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote: > On Tuesday 2012-07-17 13:08 -0600, Glenn Adams wrote: > > OK, the above all sounds reasonable. However, from a practical > perspective, > > we would need to do one of the following: > > > > (1) go back and add such "Canonical Order" lines to the CSS2.1 spec (via > > errata); > > (2) define a new spec which does only this, i.e., define Canonical > Ordering > > for each property; or > > (3) include such normative definitions in CSSOM itself; > > We've already started adding Canonical Order lines to a number of > modules; it's part of the module template. > > We don't necessarily need to do any of these immediately to address > the properties that aren't yet covered; it would just mean that > property serialization order for some properties isn't yet defined. > But as we have the time to do the research, I think my preference > would either be for (2) above or for a wiki that would eventually > get included in appropriate modules once it was complete. Yes, I was thinking (2) was preferable as well. As a start in that direction, I will draft a new CSSOM related module, let's call it cssom-canonical-order. Since this is mostly a CSSOM related behavior in the first place, it makes sense (IMO) to group it thus. WDYT?
Received on Tuesday, 17 July 2012 20:11:30 UTC