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

Re: [css3-syntax] Style rules as a syntactic construct vs. selector + declarations that apply to elements

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 08:43:17 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDTw04mJbQ6z+O+28WrzPQwLz-uD_Aome0uDdkGdAB-dQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 12:22 AM, Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Proposed changes
> ----------------
>
> * Maybe rename "style rule" to something that only reflect the syntax and
> not the semantics. Ideas for the name? Tab had "qualified declaration
> block".

I want something that ends in "rule", for the parallel naming.
However, "qualified rule" sounds okay, and not *too* long.

> * Rename "selector" (in Syntax only) to "X prelude", where X is the result
> of the above. This parallels nicely with "at-rule prelude".

Yes, once we decide on the new name, I'll switch over to just using
"prelude" for everything.

> * Remove the definition of X being a Selector + declarations that apply to
> elements.
> * For top-level style rules, have that definitions in css3-cascade.
> (css3-animation and css3-conditional already define how to interpret nested
> stuff with the style rule syntax.)

Hm, I'd want to see details of what you're proposing here.


> Execution
> ---------
>
> If we want this, I can make the edits in a branch and make a pull request
> for review. (Yes, you read that last part right. More on that soon ^_^)

DO IT.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2013 15:44:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:05 GMT