W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2013

Re: [css4-pseudo] The need for more powerful pseudo elements

From: Tom Wardrop <tom@tomwardrop.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 08:59:08 +1000
Message-ID: <CAOvmfaiXGS1mj374voLsYoU0HfCXdPqy5nsyrr=n6tuyZDFjZw@mail.gmail.com>
To: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "Sam L'ecuyer" <sam@cateches.is>
Decorators, shadow DOM and all of that is all very interesting, and opens
up many possibilities, but they're quite complicated proposals and verbose
in syntax. If I'm a styling a web page, the bother of implementing a
decorator to allow me to add a drop-shadow or some other minor visual
enhancement probably won't be worth it. I'll probably just end up adding
another span to my markup if I've used up my quota of ::before and ::after
pseudo-elements.

I think inline box generation within pure CSS is still a very relevant
need. I think CSS zen garden serves as a good example where decorators
would probably be useless. Decorators use HTML, therefore, if you have a
situation where you cannot modify or add HTML, decorators are going to be
of little use.

Also, if ordinals are such a pain in the ass (I don't really like them
myself), is there any particular reason why ::before and ::after can't be
named, e.g. span::after(shadow) { } or span::after("my shadow") { }?

Cheers,
Tom
Received on Monday, 29 April 2013 22:59:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:10 UTC