- 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