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

Re: CSS Variables

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 12:31:59 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTikk7-sH2-ntr5j+6AyHZAAsaPQyHnZrO3s31E7X@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Sylvain Galineau
<sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf
>> Of Tab Atkins Jr.
>> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2011 10:32 AM
>> To: Daniel Glazman
>> Cc: www-style list
>> Subject: Re: CSS Variables
>
>> I don't *think* either choice is particularly easier or harder to
>> implement.  I preferred var() as well, but I got pretty overwhelming
>> feedback from both implementors and authors that they preferred the
>> brevity of just using a $ prefix.
>
> Care to elaborate on the volume and source of this feedback from implementors
> and authors ? It's hard to understand what 'overwhelming' means without any
> context. (Bonus points if they would send this feedback to the mailing list).

Basically *every* other Chrome person internally preferred the $
prefix, including the one implementing the experimental support.  I'm
the only one internally who preferred using var().

Externally, two of the main SASS developers (Nathan Weizenbaum and
Chris Eppstein) have told me they prefer the $ prefix (not surprising,
since it's what SASS uses for vars).  When I gave the talk a few weeks
ago about these experiments, I had several attendees (who I don't know
the names of, sorry) independently tell me they didn't like var(), and
wanted the $ prefix or something similar.

~TJ
Received on Monday, 7 February 2011 20:42:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:37 GMT