W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > November 2013

Re: [selectors] :sorted pseudoclass for sorted tables

From: Anselm Hannemann <info@anselm-hannemann.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 08:36:11 +0100
Cc: Peter Linss <peter.linss@hp.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <964ACDC9-195C-4212-87EC-70CF869F58DE@anselm-hannemann.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
On 26.11.2013, at 05:49, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:

> On 11/25/2013 08:06 PM, Peter Linss wrote:
>> It’s also unfortunate that the selector uses ‘ascending’ and
>> ‘descending’ where HTML uses ‘’ and ‘reversed’ for the sort order.
>> It would be easier for authors to remember if they were in sync.
> We could use 'normal' and 'reverse'
>  http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-animations/#animation-direction
> (Should HTML be using 'reverse' instead of 'reversed'?)

I think it should be either 'reversed' or 'reverse'. Lists [1] though have 'reversed' so I’d prefer that, 
it might be more common than the newer animation speced 'reverse'.

Hopefully this will be unified so that either reversed or reverse is used in HTML but not different 
ones in some specs.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/grouping-content.html#the-ol-element

-Anselm Hannemann
Received on Tuesday, 26 November 2013 07:36:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:37 UTC