- From: Sean Goresht via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 05:33:45 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I'll chime in here as an instructor at Canada's leading, intensive coding bootcamp. In short, me and my staff nearly unanimously vote **in favour** of the version bump to CSS4. As programmers, we understand the importance of naming things. Adopting the name of "CSS4" **does not limit what the CSSWG can or can't add** to the spec; just like HTML and its newer, less-understood cousin HTML5.1 (arguably also due to marketing). Rather, the spec lives on as the working group deliberates the feature set finally offered. ## CSS4 Feature Controversy A more pertinent question becomes **which newer features to include** in the CSS4 spec. At Lighthouse, we don't have any _particular_ opinion on which features we expect in CSS4, but for marketing purposes, it seems apparent to us that the spec include, **at the very least** _parent selectors_. Again, the working group doesn't have to have finalized the nature of these features at launch to change the name. ## Major Benefits ### Easier to Understand We believe the name "CSS4" makes understanding the "new" features included in its spec easier to understand. In the same way that our students initially struggled with the EcmaScript Standards Committee's transition from "ES6" to "ES2015", "ES2017", etc., we foresee students struggling with comprehension of "new" CSS features vs. "CSS3", "just CSS", and "new" CSS features like custom properties and grid layout. ### Easier to Market Using the name "CSS4" allows us to easily convey a subset of features and allows for increased marketing to those who have limited knowledge of CSS features. Current businesses may see the need to "upgrade" due to the increased affixed version number. ## Known Downsides ### Too New Having to teach hundreds of students with little to no programming background every year, myself and my colleagues have observed **a lack of interest** in "new" technologies; our students, whether due to the nature of the fast-paced course, tend to gravitate to the tools we teach them to use during the course (React, JSX, Ruby, Express, NodeJS). At Lighthouse, we fear that CSS4 may fall into this category -- especially if support lacks in evergreen browser vendors. ### Incomplete If browser vendors fail to add support for the new features encapsulated in CSS4, we expect a decrease in interest from our students -- also potentially leading to the exclusion of such material from our course. In short, **CSS4 will need major evergreen browser support** in order for us to include and teach it. ## Let's Call it "CSS4" At Lighthouse, we still feel that encapsulating newer CSS features in a featureset known as "CSS4" will ultimately benefit the community (including the education sector). We predict that in the event of an incomplete spec or lacking browser support, this will motivate browser vendors to hasten and to prioritize development and support. Ultimately, we understand that features evolve and change over the lifetime of their drafting in the working group, and we feel that the working group can accommodate the inclusion through marketing channels and through the community. Let's call it "CSS4". 👍 -- GitHub Notification of comment by srsgores Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4770#issuecomment-592887722 using your GitHub account
Received on Saturday, 29 February 2020 05:33:47 UTC