- From: Max Romantschuk <max@provico.fi>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 09:02:48 +0300
- To: Justin Wood <jw6057@bacon.qcc.mass.edu>
- Cc: Orion Adrian <oadrian@hotmail.com>, W3C Style List <www-style@w3.org>
> Orion Adrian wrote: >> Actually, I've found that the lack of structure has made CSS much >> harder to write. I equate this to writing VBA stuff for MS Word. >> Rather than have multiple methods taking the different types of >> parameters, it had one method that would handle all contingencies and >> the user had to look up the method every time to see what parameters >> had to be set when in what situations. It's truly a nightmare. >> >> This is how I feel when trying to code for CSS. I can never remember >> what properties are available when. It's also not helpful that the CSS >> documentation is not presented in such a way as to make this easy to >> remember. CSS is not a programming language, nor will it ever be. CSS requires pattern-based thinking as opposed to traditional procedural programming, but this is desired. The same applies for XSLT. >> CSS 2 has a fairly simple, yet incosistent grammar, and unfortunately >> its lack of structure makes it hard to code (i.e. language structure >> only exists to help people memorize it, as structure helps >> memorization and comprehension). >> >> Perhaps we need to start looking at introducing more structure into >> CSS and revise the syntax, be it another language or not. Introducing more structure would only serve to complicate the language. When need be to have more elaborate syntax using a preprocessor is a good idea. CSS should not be laiden with syntactic sugar more than is absolutely necessary. .max -- Max Romantschuk http://max.nma.fi/
Received on Tuesday, 29 June 2004 02:02:52 UTC