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

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

From: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 23:15:39 +0200
Message-ID: <DUB120-W2334E0162CB2002342D303A5BD0@phx.gbl>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
CC: CSS WG <www-style@w3.org>
Well, this escalated quickly...  > From: brad.kemper@gmail.com
> 
> On May 2, 2013, at 10:48 AM, François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote:
> 
> > No, I'm NOT against anonymous boxes or boxes that do not generate content.
> > However, as soon as you're using mutliple boxes to generate styling boxes
> > and use no name or self-explanatory convention, your code become
> > unmaintainable.
> 
> This is a very different argument than the one I responded to, where you said that generated content is not for styling.  Nope, I said they were not created for this purpose.   > When I corrected that statement, you then implied that I didn't know what I'm talking about, and that I shouldn't say such bold things. Now you say you are not against such generated boxes used for styling, which is in direct contradiction to your earlier statement that caused me to reply.
Reread my mail. I reacted because you said pseudo-elements were meant for styling. They were not made for this purpose, period. This doesn't mean they cannot be used for styling nor that I'm against using them for that. People are free to do what they want if I'm not impacted. However, I'm against allowing a styling mechanism where you have to copy paste your styling every time (not referencable), which is not self-contained (therefore WYSIWIG can't help you much) and which is prone to conflicts. 		 	   		  
Received on Thursday, 2 May 2013 21:16:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 2 May 2013 21:16:07 UTC