- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2013 23:25:34 +0200
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "Peter Sloetjes" <pjs.nl@live.com>
On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 01:01:00 +0200, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote: > On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 22:30:10 +0200, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> > wrote: > >> Another option is to let setProperty(value) i.e. with the second >> argument omitted leave the priority alone. > > Oops, I meant setProperty(property, value) I've now specced this. https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/rev/1a4eaf3f7f1d >> This would be a change in behavior, but the current behavior seems >> unexpected and is likely to result in buggy code. Does anyone know if >> there are pages that would break if setProperty(value) (or with the >> property = value; syntax) would *not* unset !important ? > > This seems unlikely since IE10/WebKit/Blink don't do that. Instead they > do nothing for style[property] = value or style.setProperty(property, > value, '') if property is !important. To unset !important, you have to > call removeProperty first. > > There might be pages that rely on that behavior, of course, but then > they would be broken in Gecko/Presto, which follow the spec. > > I could see an argument for doing what IE10/WebKit/Blink do. OTOH it's not behavior I would expect. > If you set something to !important, you don't want it overridden by > declarations that are not !important. Should we change the spec? (If we > do, that would rule out my proposal above, but we could go with > something else to opt in.) > -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Sunday, 18 August 2013 21:20:18 UTC