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

Re: objection re: RESOLVED: setProperty's handling of importance logically behaves same as appending a declaraiton (like IE/WebKit)

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 13:04:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBSEo2HaH=z_u4Jgmy71cyWKQQzKGdkqBG=8knT5wfRUw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Cc: Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 18:36:15 +0200, Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com> wrote:
>> Further, my understanding of dbaron's issue with "always replace in place"
>> semantics for setProperty is that it _doesn't_ always move set declarations
>> to the end.  From related discussion with him offline, I am under the
>> impression that the main thing he cares about is
>>
>>    selector {
>>        margin-left: 10px;
>>        margin-start: 5px;
>>    }
>>
>> being rewritten as
>>
>>    selector {
>>        margin-start: 5px;
>>        margin-left: 10px;
>>    }
>>
>> after `setProperty("margin-left", "10px", "")`, so that order can control
>> which of these related properties actually applies.
>
> I haven't seen this being stated as a requirement, but maybe I've missed it.
> It would be good if David could clarify his position here.

Yes, this was explicitly one of dbaron's lines of reasoning for
preserving the idea of the set being ordered.  He alluded to it during
the f2f discussion, and has brought it up in email threads about this.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 12 September 2013 20:05:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:34 UTC