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

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

From: Divya Manian <manian@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 12:58:21 -0700
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, Chris Eppstein <chris@eppsteins.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CBFF8E3F.301F%manian@adobe.com>
On 6/14/12 12:43 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

>The future always makes our well-considered designs look stupid and
>short-sighted.  Can you explain why you think the current structure is
>future-hostile for something?  The only thing I know of so far that
>the current design prevents is using a variable's value for a property
>name.  As far as I can tell, the only use-case for this is renaming
>properties to shorter forms, though, which doesn't seem like a
>sufficiently strong use-case to warrant changing the syntax around it.

I am not saying it is! I am just saying we need to be prepared for
surprises as almost every new feature we have introduced in CSS in the
recent months has surprised us with dramatic turns. We can't keep saying
'oh that was an outlier' every time we keep coming across one. And I am
pretty sure CSS Variables will take such turns as and when we see more and
more specs incorporating them - either outside of CSS or within CSS (Web
Components, maybe SVG, who knows?)

Given we seem to be completely unsure of the direction it might take, we
should work towards the use cases we currently have while making sure
there is minimal damage to existing structures while introducing the new
feature. In my view, the current definition of a variable as a 'property'
does not seem like that is the case.

>As Sylvain says, can you actually suggest something?  I have no idea
>what you're trying to suggest I change things to.  The only concrete
>suggestions I've gotten so far have been several suggestions for
>different names within the current structure, then one suggestion for
>nesting an at-rule inside of style rules for defining vars.

>>Unfortunately, I'm not sure what else to do without suggestions, and
>>I'm not sure how to design around future pitfalls without a decent
>>example of how the current design is future-hostile to some use-case.

But I won't quibble further, I do not want your energies wasted on
debating something like this.
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2012 19:58:54 UTC

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