Bert Bos said:
> How about this: view "font:a/b c d e" as a *macro* (rather than a
> shorthand) for
>
> font-size: a
> line-height: b
> font-family: c
> font-weight: d
> font-style: e
>
> The cascading rules would then be applied *after* the `macro' has been
> expanded. (The word `expanded' is just a way of explaining the
> meaning, it doesn't say that an implementation should actually do
> macro expansion.)
>
> What do people think?
I think this is helpful. If you are going to have syntactic sugar, it
is most helpful to explicitly state what it is sugar for.
Does this also mean that automaticly generated stylesheets should
preferentially use the expanded form? This would seem to make sense,
if the sole reason for the font property is to save a bunch of typing.
-- Chris Lilley, Technical Author and JISC representative to W3C +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Manchester and North Training & Education Centre ( MAN T&EC ) | +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Computer Graphics Unit, Email: Chris.Lilley@mcc.ac.uk | | Manchester Computing Centre, Voice: +44 161 275 6045 | | Oxford Road, Manchester, UK. Fax: +44 161 275 6040 | | M13 9PL BioMOO: ChrisL | | Timezone: UTC URI: http://info.mcc.ac.uk/CGU/staff/lilley/ | +-------------------------------------------------------------------+