On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:25 AM, Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> wrote:
I see. Is there anything in particular this approach is buying us? Any properties that company-css doesn't support now, and would be suboptimal using its current approach?
Yes, it allows us to stay close to the CSS spec, which is my view is
very valuable when maintaining these lists.
Here is a concrete example: the value class `image' is defined as
follows in the CSS Image Values spec [1]:
<image> = <url> | <image-list> | <element-reference> | <gradient>
Which translates naturally to:
("image" uri image-list element-reference gradient)
It is not a CSS property, so it should go into the value class alist. It
is referenced by the `border-image-source' property as well as the
`bg-image' value class (which in turn is referenced by the
`background-image' property and `bg-layer' value class).
My point is that even though it would be possible to eliminate the need
for this value class by expanding it where it is referenced, I think
that by keeping it, it'll be much easier to make updates to it when the
CSS spec changes. I think it is worth the added complexity.
-- Simen