W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2016

Summary of calc serialization discussion

From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 21:19:33 +0000
To: CSS WG <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <639170E0-1EF9-4052-AA0E-EAC047F41F76@adobe.com>
Hey all,

Here’s my stripped-down analysis of what’s been discussed so far:

A. There is a benefit (for authors and developers) to simplifying the specified value of calc for the Typed OM.

B. There is a benefit (for debuggers and editors) for retaining the actual string in the specified value.

C. Browsers currently do not agree on what to do with specified calc() values. There is a benefit to interoperability, but there has been no evidence presented that authors care about the current differences.

Here are some options I see.

1. Solving for A and C, we define serialization rules as proposed two weeks ago, and ask browsers to converge in how their tools represent specified values. This makes things worse for B

2. Solving for B and C, we stick to specified values as the specified strings, and ask browsers to converge on that. This makes things worse for A.

3. Solving for A alone, we could define that the Typed OM uses computed value simplifications for its representation of specified calc() values, and leave things as they are with C for now.

Given the conversation so far, it seems to me that there would be objections to either 1 or 2. Is 3 an acceptable compromise?


Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2016 21:20:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:02 UTC