Guillaume

> you suddenly have rules that are to be ignored (but otherwise correctly parsed, visible through CSSOM etc.) (Sorry,) what rules should suddenly have to be ignored? I only asked...

That is what the spec wants. I have no opinion as to whether this is ideal or not, but I can imagine this can be a pain depending on the...

> This suggests we might want to proactively move normal nested rules to hang off of CSSStyleDeclaration. I would be interested to get links to the discussions considering the opposite:...

I suppose that properties duplicated in a higher version level of the same specification, eg. `background-clip` in `css-backgrounds` and `css-backgrounds-4`, are filtered out from your above list, because it is...

I think I'd rather an entire delta spec be ignored than only some parts of it. I'm thinking to CSS types extracted in `valuespaces` that may only be used in...

Regarding `` (duplicate type): - it is defined with `rect(, , , )` (all 4 type arguments are defined in prose and missing in `valuespaces`) in the grammar (value definition)...

I'm suggesting to override the definition of `clip` in a way that keeps the older syntax but removes its syntactically invalid (according to the CSS value definition syntax) reference to...

I'm late on this, sorry. I just upgraded to v4 from v3. SVG 2 is defined as superseded by CSS UI in the PR #555 related to this issue. But...

Thanks for these informations. I find it time-consuming to search for them and it is hard to remember them. > I would personally (and probably lazily?) be inclined to keep...

My requirement is to stick as closely as possible to browser behaviors and not support a future grammar if it conflicts, which theoretically should not happen due to CSS backwards...