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

Re: @import -- allow at any place in stylesheet.

From: Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:06:46 -0500
Message-ID: <CADJvFOUySsL17aoKZ076O8kne6bA+bGmVbJOVvKYP=b_vi5qzQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: "Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com" <mtanalin@yandex.ru>, www-style@w3.org
2012/1/17 Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> If we cared only about the web then we can throw a whole bunch of
>> W3C initiatives out of the window. As it is, CSS is now caring about
>> things that even some professional typesetting systems are unable to
>> currently do.
>
> Personally, I agree - we *should* throw out a whole bunch of W3C initiatives.
>
> That's irrelevant to my point, though - CSS, specifically, is designed
> around the needs of the web. (We do take on some responsibility for
> print publishing via epub, Antenna House, Prince, etc., but we've made
> decisions against them in favor of the web before.)

So two separate things here:

1. Is the current need serving the needs of the web?

- Technically, maybe (are concurrent downloads always good. Id say No)
- Practically, probably not (the current rule is confusing and leads
to errors, though you argue otherwise)

(Note: Im not advocating changing the behaviour. Im just pointing
out that the current behaviour is*making the language more
complicated, not less.)

2. Are non-web applications irrelevant for CSS?

Personally Id say NO. Intranet is extremely important, especially
when often HTML+CSS is the most natural way to solve a problem. CSS
needing to serve print needs, IMHO, directly results from Intranet use
needs.

-- 
cheers,
-ambrose
Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2012 23:07:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:48 GMT