You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
During style builds, it appears a cssom package is being used for style parsing. It appears that the only reason the parsing occurs is to re-write url values for images to default them to /app/img.
The particular package being used has an "issue" with some CSS hacks related to duplicate css rules. Perhaps not an issue due to the fact that cssom is supposed to be a standards parser, but this creates major issues when attempting to target a wide variety of browsers as we all are attempting to do ;)
You can see that the "background-image" attribute here only has one entry throwing out the rest of the the rules. Perhaps when parsing a style, we can just simply use cssom to determine if a URL() value is used for a CSS rule and then subsequently due a selective replace of the original source for that CSS Selector. Thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
During style builds, it appears a cssom package is being used for style parsing. It appears that the only reason the parsing occurs is to re-write url values for images to default them to /app/img.
The particular package being used has an "issue" with some CSS hacks related to duplicate css rules. Perhaps not an issue due to the fact that cssom is supposed to be a standards parser, but this creates major issues when attempting to target a wide variety of browsers as we all are attempting to do ;)
This is a known issue with cssom: NV/CSSOM#16
You can see an example of this using their online parse (http://nv.github.io/CSSOM/docs/parse.html)
Will be parsed to...
You can see that the "background-image" attribute here only has one entry throwing out the rest of the the rules. Perhaps when parsing a style, we can just simply use cssom to determine if a URL() value is used for a CSS rule and then subsequently due a selective replace of the original source for that CSS Selector. Thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: