feat(css): Add stroke CSS SVG properties

[meyerweb]

Description

Adds the properties stroke, stroke-dasharray, stroke-dashoffset, stroke-linecap, stroke-linejoin, stroke-miterlimit, stroke-opacity, and stroke-width.

Motivation

These properties are soon to be added to MDN reference content and need the formal syntax data to back them up.

Related issues and pull requests

Relates to mdn/content#34763.

[meyerweb]

Hooray, I finally managed to get it to lint! Ready for merge, I hope.

[bsmth]

Thanks, Eric! There's a couple of conflicts now, do you want to have a look? I've added myself as reviewer for when you're ready

[meyerweb]

Thanks, Eric! There's a couple of conflicts now, do you want to have a look? I've added myself as reviewer for when you're ready

I think I resolved them — let me know if not, thanks!

[estelle]

Addresses #750

[bsmth]

Thanks, Eric! There's a couple of conflicts now, do you want to have a look? I've added myself as reviewer for when you're ready

I think I resolved them — let me know if not, thanks!

Taking a look now 👀

[bsmth]

In https://www.w3.org/TR/fill-stroke-3/#stroke-linejoin, it has the following:

Suggested change

	"syntax": "miter | miter-clip | round | bevel | arcs",
	"syntax": "[ crop | arcs | miter ] || [ bevel | round | stupid ]",

Am I looking at the right spec?

[bsmth]

The MDN page references https://drafts.fxtf.org/fill-stroke-3/#stroke-linejoin

which has the following syntax [ crop | arcs | miter ] || [ bevel | round | fallback ]

[meyerweb]

No browser supports this syntax, and all of them support the syntax I included. Is there a way to mark formal syntaxes that diverge from reality? Happy to use that if so.

[bsmth]

It's my understanding that we should be reflecting spec land in this repo and BCD will be where we have implementation data (reality) / granularity per value, but I'm going to get confirmation and get back with an answer shortly.

[bsmth]

Hey Eric, we discussed this, and as for mdn/data we always mirror spec syntax, but considering the circumstance with SVG definitions / CSS spec definitions, your additions are good for now so that we have formal definition values.

[meyerweb]

@bsmth I wrote some responses to your feedback on formal syntaxes; let me know how best to proceed.

[bsmth]

Thanks, @meyerweb, I will merge shortly unless there's anything else outstanding, do you want to have a final check beforehand?

[meyerweb]

Thanks, @meyerweb, I will merge shortly unless there's anything else outstanding, do you want to have a final check beforehand?

Nope, go for it!