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

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

From: Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 09:20:21 +0200
To: "Ojan Vafai" <ojan@chromium.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.wesxb7id4p7avi@localhost.localdomain>
On Wed, 23 May 2012 19:32:50 +0200, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>  
wrote:

>>> 2)
>>> It is less disruptive of the grammar
>>
>> This doesn't seem like a big deal to me. The edge cases where this  
>> matters
>> are again not worth the cost.
>
> Yes, it's a small matter for implementations.
>
> More importantly, this is prioritizing theoretical purity and minor
> implementation convenience over author convenience, which is the wrong
> ordering of constituencies.

I am not at all worried about the minor inconvenience caused to the browser
vendors. I am worried about the bazillion of little tools out there that
have a good have of choking on the $ syntax.

>>> 4) Because SASS variables and CSS variables behave differently,
>>> I can reasonably see authors wanting to use either, or
>>> even wanting to use both in the same style sheet. Using the same
>>> syntax is asking for trouble.
>>
>> I think this is worth considering, but this doesn't convince me that we
>> should make the API we ship less convenient for authors coding directly  
>> to
>> the platform.
>
> More importantly, one of the maintainers of the SASS language
> explicitly told us not to worry about this issue, because SASS will
> change around CSS.  He absolutely does *not* want us to make decisions
> about CSS syntax based on avoiding confusion with SASS.  I
> respectfully suggest that we listen to him about his own project. ^_^

If $ was the only way to get variables, I'd be grateful about his statement
that he'll just fix is stuff if we break it. But as I think $ isn't much  
better,
and in my mind worse than var-, I don't see the point of breaking his  
stuff in
the first place.

  - Florian
Received on Thursday, 24 May 2012 07:20:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:54 GMT