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

Make standard CSS properties only belong to one group #243

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 6, 2018

Conversation

wbamberg
Copy link
Contributor

@wbamberg wbamberg commented Jun 5, 2018

This is a partial resolution to #239.

It updates data for standard CSS properties to make sure that they only belong to one "group", that being the most recent spec that defines them. This should be enough to make sidebars more coherent for pages like column-gap.

This is a little dodgy, I suppose, since the "most recent spec" is generally less mature than the others (e.g. break-after is still defined in CSS Regions, with the note:

This section is also defined in [CSS3-BREAK]. If that specification moves to last call with the region values, the section here can be replaced by a reference.

(https://drafts.csswg.org/css-regions-1/#region-flow-break)

But I guess that realistically, it's safe to consider that break-after is now defined in the CSS Fragmentation spec.

This PR does not update data for various nonstandard properties:

box-flex-group
box-ordinal-group
box-flex
-moz-appearance
box-lines
box-orient
box-pack
box-direction
box-align

@rachelandrew , please let me know if this looks good to you.

@wbamberg wbamberg requested a review from chrisdavidmills June 5, 2018 21:29
@rachelandrew
Copy link
Collaborator

Looks good and I agree re break-after, that should be considered part of fragmentation.

Copy link
Contributor

@chrisdavidmills chrisdavidmills left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This approach looks good to me. r+

I didn't check the whole file, but I did look over your changes and they look good. If we missed any instances, we can always iterate later on.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants