W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2008

Re: New CSS variables syntax in latest WebKit

From: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:46:24 -0500
To: Brad Kemper <brkemper.comcast@gmail.com>
Cc: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, "www-style@w3.org List" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-id: <9725384B-0684-4BF8-977B-D78F36299692@apple.com>

We've already had a regression in WebKit from the $ syntax.  People  
make $ typos in stylesheets apparently. :(

I think the function syntax is the least likely to cause backwards  
compatibility issues.

dave

On Aug 22, 2008, at 2:39 PM, Brad Kemper wrote:

>
>
> On Aug 22, 2008, at 11:07 AM, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com 
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> David Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>> (1) -webkit-var(foo)
>>> (2) =foo=
>>> (3) $foo
>>> One concern about using a symbol to represent a variable is that  
>>> there is no way to vendor-prefix it.  Then again, just using a  
>>> symbol like = or $ looks nicer than the ugly "-webkit-var" notation.
>>
>> It also looks terribly more dangerous because some server modules
>> already use such syntax for macro expansion on the server's side...
>> Honestly, I think 2 and 3 are not a good idea.
>>
>> </Daniel>
>
> They use the equal sign notation? I thought that was fairly unique  
> (which was also one of the criticisms about it).
>
> Even with the dollar sign, is macro expansion really that fragile?  
> What if you want to represent a dollar amount in your HTML? Wouldn't  
> you just escape the $ in both cases? Unexpanded macros would never  
> make it into the final rendered css, right?
>
Received on Friday, 22 August 2008 19:47:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:11 GMT