- From: Mike Sherov <mike.sherov@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 17:48:40 -0400
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAD1Dv_JD2_6ssNK8rx1+vz0RA9c3VFG_YwGtQR4RixuX=RXhew@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, 07 May 2013 18:47:20 +0200, Tab Atkins Jr. < > jackalmage@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>> The spec currently has getComputedStyle which returns "resolved value" > >>>> which > >>>> can be computed style or used style. > >>>> > >>>> Recently I added a method getDefaultComputedStyle which returns the > >>>> computed > >>>> value but ignores author CSS. > >>>> > >>>> The use case presented above asks for specified style. Are there use > >>>> cases > >>>> for the other kinds of values? Would cascaded value instead of > specified > >>>> value be better (i.e. return 'initial', 'inherit' and 'default' > instead > >>>> of > >>>> specified value)? > >>> > >>> > >>> There's definitely use-cases for always getting used styles, due to > >>> them being "close enough" to the final values used in rendering. For > >>> example, see the Grid spec, which is currently trying to specify that > >>> getComputedStyle() must return used values for its grid-definition-* > >>> properties. > >> > >> > >> Thanks. However, the grid spec doesn't state use cases for getting used > >> value, as far as I can tell. If it is documented somewhere else, please > give > >> a pointer. > > > > The use-case is figuring out how wide your tracks actually ended up, > > after the grid layout algorithm was run, so you can, for example, > > position abspos things around it, size canvases, etc. > > Talking this over with fantasai on Monday, we've come to the > conclusion that it's probably not a good idea to expose .usedStyle at > this point, for two reasons: > > 1. Not all properties *have* a used style. If a property doesn't > apply to an element, we don't define what the used value is. You > could just say that it's the same as the computed value in that case, > but that's just filling in a hole with something meaningless; there's > still not really any concept of "used value" for the property. This may be the wrong place to ask this, but what do you mean by "If a property doesn't apply to an element"? I was under the impression that an empty string would indicate this if I'm understanding correctly. For example, the used and computed values of a detached element are all empty strings because none of the properties apply to the element. I could be misunderstanding here. > 2. We can do *so much better* at used-value time. At that point we > have all the necessary information to expose lengths in *any* unit you > ask for, rather than just px. > Because of this, fantasai and I think we should hold on doing > .usedStyle, in favor of pursuing the long-discussed idea of the Values > API, which allows asking rules for their values in various units. > My original naive proposal begs for the values API as well. As long as I can get "auto" vs. "50%" vs. "50px" whenever I want for the "actual" value of the property on an element, I think we're good. What would that look like? > > ~TJ > -- Mike Sherov Chief Technologist SNAP Interactive, Inc. | Ticker: STVI http://snap-interactive.com | http://ayi.com
Received on Monday, 5 August 2013 21:49:28 UTC