W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2004

Re: @useragent (was Proposal: version at-rule)

From: Chris Moschini <cmoschini@myrealbox.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 10:01:38 -0500
To: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <1080572498.d6c1f65ccmoschini@myrealbox.com>

Sean M. Hall (and others) wrote:
> This: 
> #myDiv { 
>     width: 100px; 
>     padding: 20px; 
>
>     if( calculated-width != 100px ) 
>          width: 80px; 
> } 
> Is silly, no offense. 

Yes, it is silly, that was the point. I said in the same e-mail that the syntax I was offering was not one worth using, it was just an example of intent.

Apparently we have to pull this discussion backwards, to a discussion of whether authors can actually use this. I don't think any of the e-mails in this thread or the previous reflect reality - they all pretend that using straight CSS without a single hack gets you just what you want. Have a look at the CSS Eric Meyer writes, a guy who writes a tremendous amount of *practical* CSS, including some for the W3C. Do you see any hacks there? Yes? And those hacks are the most confusing part of any CSS for a novice.

-Chris "SoopahMan" Moschini
http://hiveminds.info/
http://soopahman.com/
Received on Monday, 29 March 2004 10:01:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:27 GMT