Add IE versions for CSS properties

[queengooborg]

Part of #3801, this PR defines IE and Edge versions for several CSS properties/types, based upon manual testing (unless otherwise specified). The changes are as follows:

• css.properties.display.ruby_values - true 7 (based upon spec date, been able to test support in IE 8)
• css.properties.flex-grow.less_than_zero_animate - false (Wondering if this is redundant and can be removed; negative values are disallowed by the spec)
• css.properties.font-variant.css_fonts_shorthand - false
• css.properties.text-align.string - false
• css.properties.text-transform.capitalize - true 3
• css.properties.transition-property.IDENT_value - true 10
• css.properties.white-space.svg_support - true 10
• css.types.calc.color_values - false
• css.types.image - true 10 (in the same spec definition as gradients)

[Elchi3]

Thank you! So happy we're about to finish this one!

css.properties.flex-grow.less_than_zero_animate - false (Wondering if this is redundant and can be removed; negative values are disallowed by the spec)

Happy to merge this as false for now, but it would be cool to file an issue on this one and get some CSS topic experts have a look at it. (it will come back at us when we deal with the other browsers anyway).

css.types.image - true 10 (in the same spec definition as gradients)

I would have expected this to be version 3 or something as images seem to be quite basic css functionality. I don't think it has to do with gradients specifically.

[queengooborg]

Happy to merge this as false for now, but it would be cool to file an issue on this one and get some CSS topic experts have a look at it. (it will come back at us when we deal with the other browsers anyway).

That's what I was thinking as well, figured we might as well worry about it later on. :P

I would have expected this to be version 3 or something as images seem to be quite basic css functionality. I don't think it has to do with gradients specifically.

Quoting from the MDN page:

"Before this, there was no explicitly defined <image> data type. Images could only be defined using the url() functional notation."

I'm assuming that the data would be referring to an explicitly-defined <image> type. Though I'm down to set it to IE 3.0 if you think it's better that way!

[Elchi3]

Ah, thanks, I didn't see that and I'm not very familiar with CSS. In that case, all good :)

[Elchi3]

Thanks! 🚀