- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 14:47:03 -0700
- To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Peter Sloetjes <pjs.nl@live.com>
Received on Wednesday, 21 August 2013 21:47:33 UTC
On Wednesday 2013-08-21 14:46 -0700, L. David Baron wrote: > > Another option is to let setProperty(value) i.e. with the second > > argument omitted leave the priority alone. 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 ? > > I think this is a really bad idea (which has apparently now made its > way into the spec according to comments in > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=903239 , although I > don't see any mention in this thread of it). Also, I think having a semantic difference between an omitted value and an empty string value here is a really bad idea and incredibly confusing. -David -- 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 𝄢 Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂 Before I built a wall I'd ask to know What I was walling in or walling out, And to whom I was like to give offense. - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)
Received on Wednesday, 21 August 2013 21:47:33 UTC