W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2012

RE: [css3-2d-transforms][css3-images] <position> grammar is duplicated or points to the wrong spec

From: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 18:46:18 +0000
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, fantasai <fantasai@inkedblade.net>
Message-ID: <9710FCC2E88860489239BE0308AC5D170EB31D6C@TK5EX14MBXC264.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Tab:
> Yes, explaining some design decisions is important for clarity,
> particularly when they can be captured in examples.
> 
> However, capturing *every* design principle is unrealistic - there's
> no reason to copypaste the design principles behind at-rules into the
> List spec, for example.  If following one of them led to a
> particularly unintuitive design, it should be documented, but not if
> it's a fairly normal thing.

How many times have various flavors of "why does background-position have ..." come up?  You'd think that at some point an editor's time could be more efficiently used capturing FAQ and publishing them, rather than explaining they percentage/length oddity, or the parameter ordering constraints, etc. every time it comes up.

I didn't say anything about pasting design principles into every module.  I was saying that design principles that form the framework for a specification should be part of the spec.  It's useful in a similar way to having a glossary so that your terminology is clearly understood.

I don't think a wiki separate from the versioned/levelled specifications is a good enough.

I'm not suggesting a 200 page, single spaced thesis.  I'm just suggesting known design choices and/or oddities get captured and attached *to* the specification itself, rather than found via web searches for "what the f is up with xyz property" on css-love-hate sites.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree here.
Received on Thursday, 2 February 2012 18:46:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:50 GMT