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

Re: computedStyle of cloneNode

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 08:08:27 +0200
Message-ID: <CADnb78iGm6BJED82py8vqNBPmoqL0DCJ+xFeHGctLiwT3+cgyw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shane Stephens <shans@google.com>
Cc: Garrett Smith <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 2:46 AM, Shane Stephens <shans@google.com> wrote:
> (1) several of us have now stated that computed style for detached nodes
> doesn't really make sense. Rune may disagree with this stance but I'm not
> sure?

It's resolved, not computed, for what it's worth. Pretty sure it was
specified this way because content relies on it being this way. Maybe
that's no longer true?

> (2) if this were a general rule then we'd have an answer for the initial
> question (what to do with computed style of a cloned node) - as the clone
> would not be in-document, it wouldn't have a computed style.

Agreed, cloning should have no material effect one way or another here.

Received on Wednesday, 4 May 2016 06:08:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:59 UTC