- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 13:38:02 -0800
- To: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
- Cc: Tom Potts <karaken12@gmail.com>, CSS WG <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:12 AM, François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote: > If I'm correct his point seems to be that > > .some { > var-x: inherit; > } > > is being affected by the [[6.1.2 Interitance]] paragraph of CSS 2.1 so that > the computed value of the 'var-x' property on the '.some' elements will > actually inherit the value of the parent, and this will affect the children > element as well as it's the computed value which is inherited and not the > specified/resolved one. If I'm not mistaken, we need to state explicitely > that the only algorithm impacting the computed value of custom properties is > the reference resolution algorithm, whatever other specifications may say > (ie: 'vw' aren't computed in 'px', inherit isn't subsituted by the value on > the parent, etc). Things that would happen at computed-value time are already taken care of, because you don't know the type of the values - it's a naked token stream - and so you can't do any resolution at all. I'm not sure whether the global keywords should have their normal effect, or be treated as part of the value. I'm inclined to let them have their normal effect, because if we let them stick around as part of the value, they'll get substituted into other properties at computed-value time, when it's already too late to actually process them (they're processed in the transition from cascaded to specified value). No reason to confuse or mislead people here. I'll file it as an issue. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2012 21:38:50 UTC