W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2011

Re: [CSSOM] Searching/Navigating stylesheets

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:15:43 -0400
Message-ID: <4DA5E84F.2090200@mit.edu>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 4/13/11 1:35 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Boris Zbarsky<bzbarsky@mit.edu>  wrote:
>> On 4/11/11 4:55 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>> Yeah, compat's always an issue.  I'd prefer trying for the (imo)
>>> better API first, though, and only giving up and switching to the
>>> version on window when we learn that there's a problem.
>> If browsers ship every 6 weeks, then we probably learn that there is a
>> problem after two releases have shipped...
> And then we can fix it 6 weeks later, rather than a year or two later. ^_^

 From what I've seen so far, we then say "but we've shipped it in two 
releases already; we can't change it anymore."

>> We can, sure.  But if all the use cases for one are also use cases for the
>> other, then we should ask ourselves whether we need a web API for the former
>> if the latter won't be doable with web APIs anyway.
> So you're arguing that disabling rulesets is possibly reasonable for a
> web API, but disabling individual properties is probably only useful
> for full-on editors which will need specialized non-web-facing APIs
> anyway, so can just put the functionality in the latter APIs?


> For example, assume you're defining some sort of ruleset nesting, like this:

Oh, I see what you were talking about.  OK.

My concern was actually about things that don't look like property-value 
pairs now (in the sense that the part before ':' is not an ident) but 
might end up as property-value pairs in the future if we extend CSS.

Received on Wednesday, 13 April 2011 18:16:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:45 UTC