Re: [counter-styles] At-risk list

On 30 October 2013 01:02, fantasai <> wrote:
> I think we should add 'pad' and 'speak-as' to the at-risk list.
> Not that I think 'speak-as' is unworthy, but we don't really
> have much in the way of CSS speech implementations. :/

FWIW, I have an experimental implementation of a slightly older draft
of the CSS Counter Styles spec (dated 2012-10-09) that I am using in
my text-to-speech project (

This does not currently support 'speak-as' (the property was not
introduced in the revision I used). However, I intend to improve and
update the implementation to the current version of the Counter Styles
spec. When I do this, I can provide feedback on the 'speak-as'

A cursory inspection of the property looks ok.

I have 2 comments regarding named style lookup:

1. Is that handling recursive counter style lookup is undefined -- for example:

    @counter-style foo {
        speak-as: foo;

Should the style be treated as not existing (i.e. default to auto) in this case?

2. When should counter style resolution take place? That is, given:

    @counter-style abc { speak-as: def; }
    @counter-style def { ... }

Will abc use def or auto as the speak-as value?

If this is valid, speak-as cycles with more than one item are possible
(e.g. a -> b -> c -> a). Thus, should there be a maximum depth to
resolve these chains before defaulting to auto?

> (If we end up adding a group-separator descriptor in response to
> then that should probably be at-risk, too.)
> ~fantasai

Received on Wednesday, 30 October 2013 01:37:33 UTC