Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Clarity on whether supported legacy name aliases are supported properties #7166

Open
gsnedders opened this issue Mar 22, 2022 · 1 comment
Open
Labels
css-cascade-4 Current Work

Comments

@gsnedders
Copy link
Contributor

gsnedders commented Mar 22, 2022

  1. should CSS.supports("word-wrap", "break-word") return true or false?
  2. should CSS.supports("(word-wrap: break-word)") return true or false?
  3. should "word-wrap" in window.getComputedStyle(document.documentElement) be true or false?
  4. should [...window.getComputedStyle(document.documentElement)].includes("word-wrap") be true or false?

IMO:

  1. all UAs say true, which falls out from "for string arguments"
  2. all UAs say true, which falls out from converting it "at parse time" (but we may want to be more explicit that we mean any property name parsing, because "at parse time" is kinda unclear as to what parse time)
  3. all UAs say true; but this I'm unsure about what the current specs imply: does "applies in the CSSOM [for] property accessors" effect the generation of WebIDL attributes?
  4. all UAs supporting word-wrap as a legacy name alias say false; does this just fall out from the getter giving "longhand properties that are supported CSS properties", on the basis that they aren't supported properties (they're instead legacy name aliases)?
@gsnedders gsnedders added the css-cascade-4 Current Work label Mar 22, 2022
@tabatkins
Copy link
Member

Definitely true for 1 and 2, because both of those successfully parse.

Unsure about 3 and 4.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
css-cascade-4 Current Work
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants