Re: [csswg-drafts] Let’s Define CSS 4 (#4770)

Great pros and cons and thank you for this good read! 

I loved most of the comments above and here are my thoughts on why I think CSS4 is not a good idea:

- `<title>Can I use... Support tables for HTML5, CSS3, etc</title>` 
This is the current [Can I use](https://caniuse.com/) `title` and I think you all agree it's far from a perfect title. But it in a way reflects the current confusion when it comes to the current namings: "HTML5, CSS3, etc". 

- Suddenly, all the articles' `title`s in the wild: "How to do this and that with CSS4", 

- In order to achieve better browser support for new CSS features,  as @huijing mentioned above, we miss Babel compared to the JS ecosystem. Therefore, from this point of view, we can't expect CSS4 to gain the same traction as ES6 and so on.

- Authors would need to edit all the existing content on "CSS4 is not a thing that exists" or "There is no such thing as CSS4"

- It's hard to properly draw a line where CSS3 "stopped" and CSS4 "began". How about CSS5 and so on? Who will draw and maintain those lines e.g. which is were?

- Is it CSS 4 or CSS4? Because we already know it's [HTML5](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4770#issuecomment-591658828) and not HTML 5. 

- Usually when you're expecting a "marketing boom", rarely that happens without a good plan and proper execution. W3C is known for lots of good things but not marketing.

- As @j9t states above, and from my experience, it's true that sometimes HTML5 or CSS3 can be considered red flags when it comes to hiring. When reading a CV, I'm interested in proper HTML and CSS skills and I wouldn't like to see CSS3, CSS4, CSS5 listed as skills in the future.

---

I'm a fan of CSS.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by catalinred
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4770#issuecomment-592510717 using your GitHub account

Received on Friday, 28 February 2020 13:24:09 UTC