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

Re: [css-variables] Last call comments

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 15:53:42 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBZ2W+Bsfvj-z-9EsabtYhXu2H1k6Gne7SxMtbiBodehA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Fran├žois REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
Cc: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 2:31 AM, Fran├žois REMY
<francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote:
> Features-wide, I agree. Syntax-wide, you argument doesn't make any sense. Changing the syntax is not really something that will 'slow down' the spec.

You haven't been here very long, have you?  ^_^  Syntax changes
totally slow down the spec.

> Whatever. I'm really under the impression that you justify with 'we want to rush' some bad decisions that will hurt in the future but that match your own personnal taste.

You can be under whatever impression you'd like, even if it's wrong.
:/  I've explained my reasoning previously in this thread, and won't
rehash it.

> It's not because you plan to delay an important feature to level 2 that you should not think about how to integrate the feature later on in your syntax.

I have given thought to this.  Every feature I know of so far can be
integrated cleanly into the current syntax.

I will ignore the rest of the hostility in this email.

> My answer is simple: All I would like is to get this discussed seriously in the group, not to impose my opinion; therefore I don't plan to 'object' or to make things any harder for you. Consider my feedback just like it is: a feedback. I believe no individual should ever have the possibility to use any kind of veto and, to be consistent with that, I just don't want to make use of one myself.

Your feedback was considered.  I've rejected it, Daniel has rejected
it, and for several parts the WG as a whole has rejected it.  That
happens sometimes; you can't win 'em all.  As should be apparent from
my feedback in this thread and others, I appreciate your feedback, and
would like to address some of it in a later version.

(Note that you don't have a veto - no one does, actually.  The WG can
override anyone's objection, it's just a bit of a hassle.  We have to
officially resolve on it, and then justify it to the director when we
make a transition.)

Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2013 23:54:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:08 UTC