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

Re: [css-variables] CSS Variables are a NEW kind of variable

From: Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 03:50:05 +0800
Message-ID: <4FDA406D.6030400@csail.mit.edu>
To: Fran├žois REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>
CC: www-style@w3.org
(12/06/15 3:34), Fran├žois REMY wrote:
> | On the other hand, I don't know if the WG or W3C allows this, but a way
> | to move this forward without disturbing the editor seems to be to ask
> | Brian and folks to fork the spec into a tutorial-like Web developer
> | version, where the terminology can be tweaked to make sure the least
> | people are "confused".
> I think it will just add to the confusion. Let's keep one specification,
> one name for a single feature.
> If the spec editor dislike a proposal so much it don't want to maintain
> the spec if the change is done, we've got a problem we need to address
> another way than to fork a specification. I'm admirative of Tab's work
> and I seriously don't think he would refuse a change if it was accepted
> by the majority as a better idea.

The reason I am mentioning this is that the editor has a lot more
technical issues he needs to resolve. Asking him to do a global
s/variable/user-defined property/ replace to the spec at this point is
perhaps a burden to him, while other people can contribute this by
constantly tweaking the terminology at their place to see what's more of
an acceptable/least-confusing one.

But as I said, if the editor is willing to do this replace now, that's
fine by me too. I just hope we don't spend too much time debating
editorial matters.

Received on Thursday, 14 June 2012 19:50:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:00 UTC