Atom editor highlighting issue
Why would an element be highlighted following a transition property in css? I'm using Atom text editor.
the background property is highlighted in my editor.
.squares
width: 30%;
padding-bottom: 30%;
float: left;
margin: 1.66%;
border-radius: 15%;
transition: background 0.3;
[ A screenshot of the highlighting ][1]
1]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/n4Ih1.png
css css-transitions atom-editor
asked Nov 15 '18 at 23:59
hero0nezerohero0nezero
63
add a comment |
Why would an element be highlighted following a transition property in css? I'm using Atom text editor.
the background property is highlighted in my editor.
.squares
width: 30%;
padding-bottom: 30%;
float: left;
margin: 1.66%;
border-radius: 15%;
transition: background 0.3;
[ A screenshot of the highlighting ][1]
1]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/n4Ih1.png
css css-transitions atom-editor
asked Nov 15 '18 at 23:59
hero0nezerohero0nezero
63
Thanks for the feedback. I just found that out through some searching.
– hero0nezero
Nov 16 '18 at 0:05
Actually, it would be useful to see the highlighting, so how about posting code and screenshot?
– idleberg
Nov 16 '18 at 10:45
add a comment |
Why would an element be highlighted following a transition property in css? I'm using Atom text editor.
the background property is highlighted in my editor.
.squares
width: 30%;
padding-bottom: 30%;
float: left;
margin: 1.66%;
border-radius: 15%;
transition: background 0.3;
[ A screenshot of the highlighting ][1]
1]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/n4Ih1.png
css css-transitions atom-editor
asked Nov 15 '18 at 23:59
hero0nezerohero0nezero
63
Why would an element be highlighted following a transition property in css? I'm using Atom text editor.
the background property is highlighted in my editor.
.squares
width: 30%;
padding-bottom: 30%;
float: left;
margin: 1.66%;
border-radius: 15%;
transition: background 0.3;
[ A screenshot of the highlighting ][1]
1]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/n4Ih1.png
css css-transitions atom-editor
css css-transitions atom-editor
asked Nov 15 '18 at 23:59
hero0nezerohero0nezero
63
asked Nov 15 '18 at 23:59
hero0nezerohero0nezero
63
edited Nov 16 '18 at 23:47
hero0nezero
asked Nov 15 '18 at 23:59
hero0nezerohero0nezero
63
asked Nov 15 '18 at 23:59
hero0nezerohero0nezero
63
asked Nov 15 '18 at 23:59
hero0nezerohero0nezero
63
63
Thanks for the feedback. I just found that out through some searching.
– hero0nezero
Nov 16 '18 at 0:05
Actually, it would be useful to see the highlighting, so how about posting code and screenshot?
– idleberg
Nov 16 '18 at 10:45
add a comment |
Thanks for the feedback. I just found that out through some searching.
– hero0nezero
Nov 16 '18 at 0:05
Actually, it would be useful to see the highlighting, so how about posting code and screenshot?
– idleberg
Nov 16 '18 at 10:45
Thanks for the feedback. I just found that out through some searching.
– hero0nezero
Nov 16 '18 at 0:05
Thanks for the feedback. I just found that out through some searching.
– hero0nezero
Nov 16 '18 at 0:05
Actually, it would be useful to see the highlighting, so how about posting code and screenshot?
– idleberg
Nov 16 '18 at 10:45
Actually, it would be useful to see the highlighting, so how about posting code and screenshot?
– idleberg
Nov 16 '18 at 10:45
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
This appears to be a bug in the syntax highlighter for CSS. According to MDN, "background" is a valid transition-property. However, the syntax-highlighter package adds the classes syntax--invalid and syntax--deprecated.
It turns out that any of these properties are marked the same. Since those rules are meant for something else, it's clearly a bug that you should probably report.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 10:54
idlebergidleberg
7,27352740
I have added a photo to the original post
– hero0nezero
Nov 16 '18 at 23:50
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53329543%2fatom-editor-highlighting-issue%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
This appears to be a bug in the syntax highlighter for CSS. According to MDN, "background" is a valid transition-property. However, the syntax-highlighter package adds the classes syntax--invalid and syntax--deprecated.
It turns out that any of these properties are marked the same. Since those rules are meant for something else, it's clearly a bug that you should probably report.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 10:54
idlebergidleberg
7,27352740
I have added a photo to the original post
– hero0nezero
Nov 16 '18 at 23:50
add a comment |
This appears to be a bug in the syntax highlighter for CSS. According to MDN, "background" is a valid transition-property. However, the syntax-highlighter package adds the classes syntax--invalid and syntax--deprecated.
It turns out that any of these properties are marked the same. Since those rules are meant for something else, it's clearly a bug that you should probably report.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 10:54
idlebergidleberg
7,27352740
I have added a photo to the original post
– hero0nezero
Nov 16 '18 at 23:50
add a comment |
This appears to be a bug in the syntax highlighter for CSS. According to MDN, "background" is a valid transition-property. However, the syntax-highlighter package adds the classes syntax--invalid and syntax--deprecated.
It turns out that any of these properties are marked the same. Since those rules are meant for something else, it's clearly a bug that you should probably report.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 10:54
idlebergidleberg
7,27352740
This appears to be a bug in the syntax highlighter for CSS. According to MDN, "background" is a valid transition-property. However, the syntax-highlighter package adds the classes syntax--invalid and syntax--deprecated.
It turns out that any of these properties are marked the same. Since those rules are meant for something else, it's clearly a bug that you should probably report.
answered Nov 16 '18 at 10:54
idlebergidleberg
7,27352740
answered Nov 16 '18 at 10:54
idlebergidleberg
7,27352740
answered Nov 16 '18 at 10:54
idlebergidleberg
7,27352740
answered Nov 16 '18 at 10:54
idlebergidleberg
7,27352740
7,27352740
I have added a photo to the original post
– hero0nezero
Nov 16 '18 at 23:50
add a comment |
I have added a photo to the original post
– hero0nezero
Nov 16 '18 at 23:50
I have added a photo to the original post
– hero0nezero
Nov 16 '18 at 23:50
I have added a photo to the original post
– hero0nezero
Nov 16 '18 at 23:50
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53329543%2fatom-editor-highlighting-issue%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Thanks for the feedback. I just found that out through some searching.
– hero0nezero
Nov 16 '18 at 0:05
Actually, it would be useful to see the highlighting, so how about posting code and screenshot?
– idleberg
Nov 16 '18 at 10:45