Re: [css-variables] ...let's change the syntax

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Andrew Fedoniouk
> <news@terrainformatica.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Marat Tanalin <mtanalin@yandex.ru> wrote:
>>> FWIW, I would like to repeat my recent idea of using `$` as a prefix for declaring a variable and `$()` function to get a variable value.
>>>
>>>     p {
>>>         $company-color-1: green;
>>>         background-color: $(company-color-1);
>>>     }
>>>
>>> Important part here is that retrieving a variable value is proposed to be done via _functional_ notation `$()` instead of using just prefix for both declaring and retrieving as before.
>>>
>>
>> I believe that we need to go back to the ultimate solution:
>>
>> p {
>>        var(company-color-1): green;
>>        background-color: var(company-color-1);
>>    }
>>
>> so to use 'var()'  "function" as a namespace and intention marker on
>> both sides of the
>> declaration.
>>
>> That is the most reliable and future friendly solution I believe.
>
> That's literally the exact opposite of the intention that led me to
> start this thread.  I'm trying to make custom properties and variables
> *less* connected, not more.
>

If they are not variables the let's use const() then

p {
       const(company-color-1): green;
       background-color: const(company-color-1);
   }

Or some as such.

The main goal as far as I understand is to separate standard
properties namespace from
custom ones. The only strict way of doing this in existing CSS syntax
constructs is
function notation. All these '-' and '_' tricks are really palliatives.

-- 
Andrew Fedoniouk.

http://terrainformatica.com

Received on Tuesday, 18 March 2014 18:30:27 UTC