- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:28:58 -0700
- To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Cc: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 1:17 AM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote: >> On 24 Sep 2015, at 09:02, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 5:51 AM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote: >>> * What should happen when a media condition has an unknown <mf-name> or >>> <mf-value>, or disallowed <mf-value>? >> >> I've amended that section to say it resolves to "unknown" (and then an >> MQ that resolves to unknown becomes "not all"). > > In some other part of this thread, we were agreeing that *for disallowed values*, it should be false rather than unknown. You don't think so? I could go either way, but "restricted" and "invalid today, but valid in a future level" look identical, so I'm inclined to treat them all the same. The effect is nearly identical anyway. ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 24 September 2015 18:29:45 UTC