We don't have a -tr-include-style. We have a -tr-rule-ref:selector.So if we did #1, I would go for -tr-rule-ref:property instead of -tr-include-property.
1': -tr-rule-ref:property(selector="af|foo",propertyName="color", localPropertyName="background-color") 3. -tr-rule-ref: property("background-color", "af|foo", "color"); // or something like this to make it shorter.
Right now I'm leaning towards 2.
2':
background-color: -tr-rule-ref:property("af|foo", "color");
Marius Petoi wrote, On 4/2/2010 12:28 AM PT:
Hello,Maybe you followed the discussions on this topic from http://markmail.org/search/?q=skinning#query:skinning%20order%3Adate-backward+page:1+mid:4nt2ykmdnnmcyvp4+state:resultsWe need to decide between two alternatives for the syntax of the "-tr-include-property". The two alternatives are:1. -tr-include-property: property(selector="af|foo",propertyName="color", localPropertyName="background-color")2. background-color : -tr-property-ref("af|foo", "color")The advantage of the first API is that it is quite similar to the "-tr-include-style", while for the second one that the local property name can't be mistaken with the included property.What do you think? Which is the best alternative? Regards, Marius
