W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2009

Re: New feature request

From: SimDigital - Gustavo Villa <gustavo@simdigital.com.br>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 23:50:56 -0200
Message-ID: <4994D200.3040607@simdigital.com.br>
To: James Hopkins <james@idreamincode.co.uk>
CC: www-style@w3.org

Sorry for single reply. I'm newbie here keeping learning ;-)

Lets go:
I just don't want to use this:

<body>
<div class="logo defaultwidth"></div>
<div class="search defaultwidth"></div>
<div class="menu leftwidth"></div>
<div class="news rightwidth"></div>
<div class="footer defaultwidth"></div>
</body>

I'm e-commerce software distribuitor and store owners can't change HTML,
just CSS.
In this case, maybe the logo don't will use default width for ever owners.
And, I don't want to change every class to regulate the width. I prefer
to change just one class called "defaultwidth"

By other way, to change news position I prefer to extend this to
"rightblock". Just this and my news block will be positioned in the
right place that i want, and what i need to change? One CSS line.
Without change HTML.
In this case, obviously my HTML will be like this:

<body>
<div class="logo"></div>
<div class="search"></div>
<div class="menu"></div>
<div class="news"></div>
<div class="footer"></div>
</body>

 From my point of view is much more easy!
Don't agree?

James Hopkins escreveu:
>
> FYI, you need to 'Reply to All' in your mail client when replying to 
> threads. I've CC'd www-style into this mail - hopefully it won't 
> generate a new thread
>
> On 13 Feb 2009, at 00:30, SimDigital - Gustavo Villa wrote:
>
>> Tks James, but it is a little bit different that I propose.
>>
>> "Your" both ways allow to define single values variables. It isn't 
>> the best in my point of view.
>> I don't want to write twice what property use (@variables or @define).
>
> Wrong - fantasais proposal for Constants explicitly proposes 'value', 
> 'style-set' and 'selector' constants; Glazman/Hyatts variables 
> proposal is a slightly 'looser' syntax, but presumably can achieve the 
> same.
>
>>
>>
>> I think that will be much more helpfull if we EXTEND class atributes.
>>
>> Today, if i want to align some elements centered with 1000px width, i 
>> will need to do it:
>> <style>
>> .centerAligner {
>> width:1000px;
>> margin:0px auto;
>> bla bla bla bla....
>> }
>> </style>
>> and in my HTML it:
>> <div class="myClass centerAligner"></div>
>>
>> I thing that is wrong! I don't need to change HTML to format my 
>> layout. CSS need to allow me to do this without any html changes.
>
> I don't really understand your example and how it relates to your 
> proposal- from what I can see you are demonstrating how you can apply 
> multiple classes to an element? Please provide an example of your 
> proposal based on the above 'current, real-world' example, and explain 
> how it might work. Currently your proposal example in your initial 
> mail looks a lot to me like a variables/constant function.
>
>>
>>
>> "Your way" solve my problem, but it is more a code solution that 
>> format solution.
>> My suggestion is more productive!
>>
>> Understand the difference between both?
>> Dave Hyatts & Daniel Glazmans define variables. My way extends 
>> another classes.
>> Gosh, i really don't need variables! It don't need to be a programmer 
>> language.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Villa.
>>
>>
>>
>> James Hopkins escreveu:
>>>
>>> This is covered by both Dave Hyatts & Daniel Glazmans proposal for 
>>> Variables (http://disruptive-innovations.com/zoo/cssvariables/) and 
>>> subsequent counter-proposal by fantasai 
>>> (http://fantasai.inkedblade.net/style/specs/constants/). I recently 
>>> wrote a comparison of both proposals which can be found at CSS3.Info 
>>> (http://www.css3.info/summary-of-the-two-current-css-constants-proposals/). 
>>>
>>>
>>> Hope this helps, and welcome to the mailing list :)
>>>
>>> James
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12 Feb 2009, at 19:54, SimDigital - Gustavo Villa wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is allowed today? No.
>>>>
>>>> Why to use? To simplify CSS day-by-day maintence, once it allow 
>>>> designers to use more cascade advantages.
>>>>
>>>> How does it is did today?
>>>> if we have something like this:
>>>> <div class="header"></div>
>>>> <div class="content"></div>
>>>>
>>>> To adjust site width, we need to do it:
>>>> 1)
>>>> ..header { width:800px; font-size:20px;}
>>>> ..content { width:800px; font-size:12px;}
>>>>
>>>> or:
>>>> 2)
>>>> ..header, .content {width:800px;}
>>>> ..header {font-size:20px;}
>>>> ..content {font-size:20px;}
>>>>
>>>> or still it:
>>>> 3)
>>>> <div class="header layoutwidth"></div>
>>>> <div class="content layoutwidth"></div>
>>>>
>>>> ..layoutwidth {width:800px;}
>>>> ..header {font-size:20px;}
>>>> ..content {font-size:20px;}
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that if we use the solution 1, we need to read all 
>>>> lines of CSS to be sure that we dont forget nothing.
>>>> If we use the solution 2, we need to read all lines of HTML to be 
>>>> sure that we dont forget nothing.
>>>> And if we use solution 3, we will need to change HTML if in the 
>>>> future that element dont need to be width adjusted. That solution I 
>>>> think is poor, because CSS just need to format HTML/XHTML 
>>>> generated, not to change the generated code to allow formating.
>>>>
>>>> Now, the solution that i suggest:
>>>> Create an way to concatenate classes attributes like this:
>>>>
>>>> ..layoutwidth {width:800px;}
>>>>
>>>> ..header {
>>>> import:.layoutwidth;
>>>> font-size:20px;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> ..content {
>>>> import:.layoutwidth;
>>>> font-size:12px;
>>>> }
>
> This example to me, looks exactly like a variable/constant - you're 
> defining a 'style-set' constant (".header") and subsequently importing 
> it into ".header" and ".content" selector blocks.
>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Once changed .layoutwidth, all elements that use this format will 
>>>> change, easily!
>>>> It is a simple sample, but even more complex, more util this 
>>>> feature will be.
>>>>
>>>> What about?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> SimDigital - Tecnologia com resultado
>>>>
>>>> Visite nosso site: www.simdigital.com.br
>>>>
>>>> Sorocaba (15) 34117200
>>>> Londrina (43) 33015779
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> SimDigital - Tecnologia com resultado
>>
>> Visite nosso site: www.simdigital.com.br
>>
>> Sorocaba (15) 34117200
>> Londrina (43) 33015779
>>
>
>
>


-- 
SimDigital - Tecnologia com resultado

Visite nosso site: www.simdigital.com.br

Sorocaba (15) 34117200
Londrina (43) 33015779
Received on Friday, 13 February 2009 01:51:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:16 GMT