- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 12:36:03 -0700
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 6:51 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote: > This means that failing to have a necessary 'symbols' or > 'additive-symbols' descriptor makes a @counter-style rule invalid, > and having an unnecessary 'symbols' or 'additive-symbols' descriptor > for a rule with 'system: override' makes the @counter-style rule > invalid. > > But nothing I see says that having an unnecessary 'symbols' or > 'additive-symbols' descriptor for the other six counter styles makes > the rule invalid (that is, having 'symbols' for 'system: additive' > or having 'additive-symbols' for one of the 5 systems that require > 'symbols'). This seems like an odd asymmetry. Is it intentional, > should it be fixed, or am I missing relevant spec text? Unintentional, but I'm not sure it needs to be fixed. As Xidorn says, the presense of 'symbols' or 'additive-symbols' is actively *confusing* for the override system, so requiring them not to be specified seems fine. It seems acceptable to allow a useless property for the other systems, though. That said, I'm not opposed to making the rule invalid in those other cases as well. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 26 March 2014 19:36:50 UTC