- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Sun, 1 May 2016 15:42:41 +0100
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Ting-Yu Lin <tlin@mozilla.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 04/27/2016 06:18 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > > This does have the potential for compat problems - if <ol> numbering > switches to being handled by a "counter-increment: list-item 1;" on > <li> in the UA stylesheet, then it will be overridden by author-level > 'counter-increment'. I suspect the compat impact is *low*, but it's > not zero. True. Though even if someone is setting counters on <li>, they're probably doing it in order to override the standard numbering and have therefore turned off list-style numbers. :) I agree the compat impact is likely quite low, though possibly non-zero. > I'm also fine with just doing the second part (which should have > *zero* impact) and leaving the counter-increment hack in HTML, tho > that's obviously less good. HTML needs extra counter magic to handle reversed list numbering anyway. It's not counter-increment--that could be easily handled in CSS--but counter-reset would need to be set in non-CSS UA code for reversed lists. ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 2 May 2016 21:57:11 UTC