- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 09:49:45 -0800
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>, robert@ocallahan.org, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:45 AM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote: > On Monday 2012-02-06 00:38 -0800, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com> wrote: >> > There is a recent thread on this list by Tab & fantasai about review of >> > functional notation in CSS, pretty much everything suggested there would >> > also break backwards compatiblity in incompatible ways just as much. >> >> We could change gradient syntax, honestly, because I *kept changing >> it*. It never got to stabilize, and browsers implemented it at >> various points, so everyone was somewhat different *anyway*. > > I'm not yet comfortable describing anything about gradients as a > success. I think it's entirely possible that the number of changes > the working group has made will lead to serious failure. And I > think it's definitely not a model we should emulate. I wasn't presenting it as a success. I'm happy that we ended up with something good, but I'm very sad about the amount of pain we went through to achieve it, and think in hindsight that we would have been better off stabilizing a year ago. ~TJ
Received on Monday, 6 February 2012 17:50:32 UTC