- From: Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 16:41:34 +0300
- To: "Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu" <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
- CC: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
On 7/5/12 07:41, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote:(12/05/06 0:28), Lea Verou wrote: > If you look at CSS3, then there are several longhand properties that > disallow 'normal' to be combined with other keywords, including all the > font-variant-* (and the 'font-variant' shorthand actually) and > 'unicode-bidi'. That is, I think the consistency is in favor of the > other way around. Yes, `font-variant` was the one I had in mind too. At first I thought it's not allowed for disambiguation, but now that I think of it, that wouldn't be a problem, since it's also the initial value. Therefore, you're right. > I think you meant 'forward' here? > > Yeah, if we can make backwards incompatible change, I'll probably prefer > something similar: [ backward | forward ] || round. I have to admit, I would have no clue what `round` means. I don’t think `alternate` is a great name, but I personally find it easier to understand than `round`. > As a non-English native speaker, may I ask why we use 'reverse' here > instead of 'reversed'? Kenny might have a point here. Every time I taught people about `repeating-linear-gradient`, they kept mistakenly typing it as `repeated-linear-gradient`. I'd guess it’s the same thing here. -- Lea Verou (http://lea.verou.me | @LeaVerou)
Received on Monday, 7 May 2012 13:42:11 UTC