- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 08:43:15 -0700
- To: Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 3:26 AM, Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com> wrote: > For the value of CSSRule.cssText, Dom level 2 only said: > > "cssText of type DOMString > The parsable textual representation of the rule." > > On the other hand, css-om, while not fully written, appears to try and be > more specific. It says: > > "cssText of type DOMString > The cssText attribute must return a serialization of the CSS rule." > > And the section on serialization > (http://dev.w3.org/csswg/cssom/#serialize-a-css-rule) has (a stub of) > specific instructions on how to serialize rules, including how much white > space and what kind of white space there should be. > > I was wondering about that in the context of css3-conditionals, wondering > what kind of indentation style (if any) in serialization we want to mandate, > in general and for for nested things in particular. > > Given this: > @media all { > @support (width: 1px) { > div { width: 1px } > } > } > > There are a lot of possible variations on the serialization, just tweaking > whitespace. We could we break the line for @rules, style rules, or both. We > can put opening braces on new lines, or at the end the previous line. We > could indent with tabs or spaces, and if spaces, we can pick a different > number of spaces per level of indentation, or not indent at all... > > Should we go into this? We certainly gain a little bit of interoperability > by doing it, but I am not convinced it is that significant a gain, and the > cost of specifying all this and adjusting implementations is definitely non > trivial. > > If not, when defining serialization, we could simply say "token x, followed > by white space, follow by token y..." where 'white space' is left > implementation dependent. It would be interesting to see if there's any compat impact, but I suspect just specifying "white space" will be good enough. Definitely easier than trying to define indenting. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2012 15:44:08 UTC