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

On Sep 7, 2012 8:24 AM, "François REMY" <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr> wrote:
>
....[snip] because the point is that we almost all agree, except Tab, that
it should not be using the 'var' prefix because custom properties are not
variables.

You agree, I agree, several people we have talked to, comments on twitter
and blog and our own poll agree on that point.  Tab says he has contrary
data once the verbiage itself is changed and things are explained as custom
properties.  I think that unlike most things, it is very possible to create
a way to neutrally assess which of those is more accurate.  Might as well
add a few options and just see what people find intuitve.  I seriously
don't see the harm and it would end the debate about who is speaking for
who, which is otherwise bound to go nowhere.

> The issue is much stronger than just a naming convention. Tab still view
'custom properties' as variables while most of us decided it was a bad
model to have in mind. At some point, we will have to choose between the
two models, and rather now than after the inclusion in Chrome of an
implementation of Tab's draft.
>
> While I see that 'URL Parameters should be treated as custom properties
on the root element' and the desire of separating 'use(width)' and
'use(my-main-color)', I clearly see how different the approach taken by
Tab's draft and our (Brian and I) draft. It's clearly it transcends the
naming conventions and go up to the root of the specification.

I see some differences too, but I think that is another thread :)