- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 12:51:36 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
On Wednesday 2012-04-25 08:44 -0700, L. David Baron wrote:
> On Tuesday 2012-04-10 02:11 +0800, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote:
> > While reviewing CSS3 V&U, I realized that 'cycle()' doesn't really solve
> > a use case I thought it would solve.
> >
> > Use Case A: In a User Interface built by nesting elements (say,
> > <table>), set background color on the elements alternatively along the
> > nesting level. See picture[1]
>
> Yes, it doesn't solve this case alone. (I've also never seen any
> other examples of this case.)
>
> It does solve this case in combination with variables, though, and
> I think that's a better solution than making cycle() more complex.
>
> For example:
>
> table {
> var-cycling-background: cycle(white, gray);
> background: var(cycling-background);
> }
Actually, I don't think this works, because the thing that's
inherited with variables is syntactic rather than semantic so the
cycle() behavior wouldn't get applied until it's used.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:52:06 UTC