W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2010

Re: [css4-color] @color-keyword Color Keywords

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 07:54:27 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTik-tbneYgWPYqNU8Ct1XJjdj+-79b9O_TqRMCo0@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eli Morris-Heft <eli.morris.heft@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Eli Morris-Heft
<eli.morris.heft@gmail.com> wrote:
> To be fair on this point, I am aware that there's been a lot of discussion
> about CSS variables and constants and macros. I guess that, alongside the
> suggestion in my e-mail, there was an implicit question about where the WG
> stands on putting something like that into the spec, either in general or
> specifically for colors, and what the progress along that road is.

There's still definitely interest in the WG about variables.  IIRC the
main thing that stopped them in the past was simply disagreement about
*how* to do them, not any intrinsic dislike of the concept.  It's
silly, but there you go.


>> Yeah, the WG (or at least vocal members thereof) seem to favor a
>> one-fits-all
>> variables / constants approach, almost as if this was the seventies when
>> preprocessed untyped string substitution macros were the best thing you
>> could
>> hope for. Also, a unified spec will probably take a longer time and we
>> already
>> have type-dependent keywords (e.g. font resources).
>
> I agree on all those points. The reasons my suggestion was specifically for
> color keywords (and not, say, for simple variables) were that (1) the WG
> didn't seem to be making any progress on variables as a whole, and even seem
> to be a bit cold on the idea; (2) colors are a central part of CSS and the
> color keyword situation might call for something type-sensitive; and (3)
> it's a simple proposal with not a lot of moving parts. I wouldn't presume to
> say anything about how simple it is to implement, though. ^^;;

Colors are definitely very simple, which is precisely why I *don't*
support a special @-rule for them.  ^_^  I prefer to require a bit
more complexity before introducing a heavyweight new mechanism.

~TJ
Received on Monday, 13 December 2010 16:03:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:35 GMT