Open LeaVerou opened 3 months ago
gold
is provided as a fallback in a declaration for background
, not for --color
, so validating it against the grammar of --color
seems very unexpected to me.
Yeah, fallback in var() should be completely unrelated to whatever conditions are imposed on the custom property referenced by the var(). Nothing in any of the specs suggests there should be such an effect; the behavior of the fallback is indeed just "an unregistered token stream that is validated at the point of usage".
Nothing in any of the specs suggests there should be such an effect
It's specified here: https://drafts.css-houdini.org/css-properties-values-api-1/#fallbacks-in-var-references
See also https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/360.
But I agree that this seems odd now that we have other arbitrary substitution functions that can violate the "grammar" in the fallback, e.g.:
width: attr(my-width px, auto);
^^^^ <-- Not px, but valid
Well dang, I'm dumb. But yeah, I think it's better to remove the restriction and let the fallback be anything.
The CSS Working Group just discussed [css-properties-values-api] Are fallbacks provided for registered properties validated by the CP syntax?
, and agreed to the following:
RESOLVED: Drop validation of fallbacks wrt their custom property.
Take a look at this codepen, which is surprisingly interoperable across UAs: https://codepen.io/leaverou/pen/oNRpEGO
--color
is defined as:Given that…
unset
and properties that do not inherit handleunset
asintiial
--color
’s initial value isyellowgreen
--color
is defined to not inherit…I would have expected
yellowgreen
, nottransparent
. It is especially weird that this only happens when a fallback value is provided that does not match the property syntax.Given the behavior is interoperable, @kizu assumed there must be a WPT test about this, but could not find a test that would test this interaction. The only place he found that tests the fallback not applying when the variable uses its fallback value is here: https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/css/css-pseudo/highlight-cascade/highlight-cascade-003.html#L8-L14 But there is no test (or we can't find it) that covers this weird behavior.
I guess, if anything describes what should happen, then it is https://drafts.csswg.org/css-variables/#invalid-variables
However, that is not what is happening in the second test. Changing whether the property inherits and setting
--color: lime
on the parent does not change the outcome of the second test, only the others: https://codepen.io/leaverou/pen/oNRpEGOIt should be clarified in the specs whether the value of the fallback used in the
var()
should also be validated by the custom property syntax or treated as an unregistered token stream that is validated at the point of usage (I would vote for the latter, but no strong opinion) and what the behavior is in that case.Also tagging as Agenda+ since
@property
usage is going to pick up soon now that Firefox has implemented, and authors are soon going to start hitting this.Thanks to @kizu for his help in tracking this down