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

[css-variables] Custom properties using the 'var' prefix? (Issue 1, !important)

From: François REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 11:40:57 +0200
Message-ID: <C2CFEE381A754348B4A5789BE61A6892@FREMYD2>
To: "CSS WG" <www-style@w3.org>
Most of us don’t understand why, when ‘Variables properties’ were renamed into ‘Custom properties’ in the spec, the spec itself wasn’t renamed ‘CSS Custom Properties’ like our proposal is.

Also, we contest the ‘var’ prefix being used. If ‘custom properties are not variables’, using the ‘var’ keyword doesn’t make sense anymore. 
The name of CSS Custom Properties specification has been chosen on purpose. Since this spec aims to differentiate itself from macro-like functionality of preprocessed variables, it doesn't make sense for it to be called CSS Variables. In fact, it doesn't define any variable at all, only properties and property references.

This specification uses the 'my' prefix for custom properties on purpose for custom properties for three main reasons:

  1.. It's the prefix that developers used naturally, for years, when they were using or asking custom properties. If necessary, I can find a lot of samples of that. 
  2.. It does clearly explain the status of the property: the property is yours, you can use it for anything you would like to and the browser won't mess up with your code. 
  3.. Meanwhile, it's a very short prefix that's not cumbersome to type. 
Beside this, this specification also replace the 'var' and 'parent-var' functional notations with the more informative 'use()' and 'inherit()' functions. It’s interesting to note that ‘color: inherit(color)’ has the same behavior as ‘color: inherit’ in our proposal.
Received on Thursday, 6 September 2012 09:41:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:59 GMT