[csswg-drafts] [css-variables][Editorial] Move second half of Example 11 to section 2.1

LeaVerou has just created a new issue for 
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts:

== [css-variables][Editorial] Move second half of Example 11 to 
section 2.1 ==
Example 11:

> For example, the following code incorrectly attempts to use a 
variable as a property name:
> .foo {
>   --side: margin-top;
>   var(--side): 20px;
> }
> This is not equivalent to setting margin-top: 20px;. Instead, the 
second declaration is simply thrown away as a syntax error for having 
an invalid property name.

> Similarly, you can’t build up a single token where part of it is 
provided by a variable:
> 
> .foo {
>   --gap: 20;
>   margin-top: var(--gap)px;
> }
> Again, this is not equivalent to setting margin-top: 20px; (a 
length). Instead, it’s equivalent to margin-top: 20 px; (a number 
followed by an ident), which is simply an invalid value for the 
margin-top property. Note, though, that calc() can be used to validly 
achieve the same thing, like so:
> 
> .foo {
>   --gap: 20;
>   margin-top: calc(var(--gap) * 1px);
> }

The second example does not actually follow from the first, and does 
not demonstrate anything discussed in Section 3, despite the use of 
"Similarly". Instead, this is demonstrating a consequence of the 
definition, which is presented in 2.1, and specifically this part:

> The <declaration-value> production matches any sequence of one or 
more tokens, so long as the sequence does not contain  
`<bad-string-token>`, [...]

Therefore, I think it would make more sense to move that example to 
2.1.

Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/462 using your GitHub 
account

Received on Monday, 12 September 2016 01:02:45 UTC