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

RE: [css-variables] Using $foo as the syntax for variables

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 22:45:11 +0000
To: Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
CC: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3C4041FF83E1E04A986B6DC50F0178290A354E06@TK5EX14MBXC262.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

[Marat Tanalin:]
> BTW, I believe most of real-world websites does not use SASS at all and
> use regular standard stylesheets instead. So CSS/SASS interoperability
> should not be an important blocker for CSS to get better.

I prefer data to belief. And the raw number of sites that use it would not 
be the only factor anyway. If the 0.01% of sites that use SASS pulled in 200m 
unique users then I would, on balance, prefer solutions that do not make their
use of CSS Variables harder than it needs to be. I would at least like us to have 
that conversation with some of them.
On the other hand, if too few are using SASS for us to care then there are no obvious 
usability benefits to matching their conventions and we should move on.

> If something should be changed, it's SASS based on CSS choices, not CSS
> based on SASS choices (moreover, as far as I can recall, something like
> this has been stated by SASS author himself here in www-style list
> before).

Who uses which syntax was not my point. My concern was that making CSS and
Certain frameworks depend on the same syntactical constructs may not be such 
an obvious win; even from an education standpoint any runtime difference is 
a possible source of confusion for the people most likely to care about a 
common syntax: those who already use these frameworks. So the fact that these
frameworks have some traction is not necessarily a good reason to imitate them. 

That being said, it is true that server-side pre-processors are somewhat more 
amenable to change than vast amounts of static content.

> 22.05.2012, 23:22, "Sylvain Galineau" <sylvaing@microsoft.com>:
> > [Brad Kemper:]
> >
> >>  I think this would cause trouble to people who use SASS, but still
> >> want
> >>  some variable use in their final, rendered CSS. Also, I don't like
> >> the
> >>  idea of a completely different pattern (functional notation) for
> >> similar
> >>  use combined with a second argument, such as default.
> >
> > I have been concerned about this as well; not only might it cause some
> > code maintenance confusion but the assumption seems to be that the two
> > shall never meet in the same stylesheet. Though, for now, I am lacking
> > the imagination to think of the awesome one could do by generating CSS
> > variable constructs with SASS on the server, I'm not sure we can make
> > this assumption. Or that it is desirable to make using the two
> > together more difficult. We simply have no control on whether and when
> > SASS will go away. We do have control on how easy/hard it would be to
> > use variables and frameworks such as SASS together though.
Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2012 22:46:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:59 UTC