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

Re: [css-syntax] Comments on "Parser Algorithms" section

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 16:33:38 -0700
Message-ID: <51CB7A52.8080407@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 06/26/2013 03:02 AM, Simon Sapin wrote:
> Le 26/06/2013 00:12, L. David Baron a écrit :
>> I'm a little concerned about the "component value" terminology; I'd
>> prefer using a term that doesn't involve "value".  But I don't have
>> a better idea right now.
>
> Previous revisions of this spec used "primitive" for this concept, until we noticed that the concept is the same as in Values
> & Units:
>
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-values/#value-defs
>
> But I understand the desire to make a distinction. Does "primitive" sound better than "component value"?

Maybe "component primitive" instead of "component value"?
Then at least it ties back to the concept of "component value",
but implies it's a slightly lower-level concept.

~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 26 June 2013 23:34:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:12 UTC