W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > January 2021

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-cascade-5] Layers terminology bikeshed (#5840)

From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 17:51:51 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-768461293-1611769909-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-cascade-5] Layers terminology bikeshed`.

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic: [css-cascade-5] Layers terminology bikeshed<br>
&lt;dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5840<br>
&lt;dael> miriam: This was raised by bkardell who is not on. I think others had similar concerns. I don't know if we need to wait for him<br>
&lt;dael> miriam: I can introduce it. One of the reasons we were drawn to layers is it's a nice methaphor like layering paint or following photoshop<br>
&lt;dael> miriam: Conflicts with existing like z-index and top-layer. Interest in finding something else.<br>
&lt;dael> miriam: Levels has come up repeatedly. A few others in thread<br>
&lt;dael> leaverou: Wasn't this called custom origins in the past? Reason to move from that?<br>
&lt;rachelandrew> q+<br>
&lt;dael> miriam: Different place then origins in the cascade. These are below shadow dom<br>
&lt;dael> florian: Other reason is origin is overloaded with single-origin policy. Not easy to confuse, but heavily used term<br>
&lt;astearns> ack rachelandrew<br>
&lt;dael> rachelandrew: I think there are a lot of people who have done this for a long time that have heard of term from netscape layers and then dreamweaver. I don't hear people talking to me about css layout with those terms. Might need explaining if we go with layers, though, because i can see old school people thinking it's layout<br>
&lt;astearns> ack fantasai<br>
&lt;smfr> q+<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: We don't use layer in our specs except top-layer. Not that broadly used officially but origins is. Concern with levels is that it implies more of a one on top of the other in a straightforward order. Cascade layers have a sandwich effect where rules appear in two places and wrap around other layers. When you blow out a layer you can revert the blowing out if you put a !important<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: It has more structure then I would guess from level. Having analyogy with photoshop layers is one of the reasons we chose<br>
&lt;dael> smfr: We use layers in multiple BG images in CSS BG spec<br>
&lt;dael> leaverou: Regardless of if we use it in specs it has a visual meaning anywhere else<br>
&lt;dael> florian: All words have meanings<br>
&lt;dael> leaverou: css and photoshop intersection is large<br>
&lt;dael> florian: Fair<br>
&lt;dael> florian: I'm unconvinced by levesl<br>
&lt;dael> leaverou: Agree levels is confusing<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> Put me on the anti-level bandwagon as well<br>
&lt;JonathanNeal> Figma refers to layers similarly as Photoshop, FWIW.<br>
&lt;fantasai> s/we chose/we chose it, they're similar as ideas of how to organize work/<br>
&lt;dael> leaverou: Added ideas in issue. What about defaults since they're low priority or group<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Default sound css resets<br>
&lt;smfr> strata<br>
&lt;jensimmons> q+<br>
&lt;smfr> q-<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: photoshop layers have imilarity in that it's a way to org work which you can arrange and there's transparency. I think it's a good analogy. they're called cascade layers, not just layers. I think layers is more evocative<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: One possibility is to bake the full term into @rule so it's @cascadeLayer and not just @layer. Makes it very clear<br>
&lt;astearns> ack jensimmons<br>
&lt;dael> jensimmons: I was pretty determined on layers. Then had conversation recently and they had reasons to not like name. Bothered me for a while and I think it's b/c I agree with them. I can argue both that layers is confusing and it's not.<br>
&lt;bradk> “Layers” by itself evokes something like z-axis groups.<br>
&lt;dael> jensimmons: Layers is the idea of onion skin or layers is this thing for design. I think levels is a better word, though. You think about garages L1, L2, L3 without overlapping in other ways layer is used in rendering engine and in design<br>
&lt;argyle> @compose?<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: But parking levels implies it's just there at that level. You don't see through the floor. If you park a garage on L1 it doesn't merge wil car on L4 to make a pattern. But that this what happens in layers in photoshop with transparency. Same with cascade. If you don't set at that layer it cascades in from below.<br>
&lt;dael> jensimmons: I don't like using whole phrase cascadelayer b/c hard for people to know how to spell cascade. Wonder how layer or level translates. I don't know, but it's something to think about<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Yeah, keyword layer but call it cacade layer where we talk about it<br>
&lt;bradk> @cascade-layer sounds better to me<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Full name in tha @rule makes it easier to read. You can't mistake a cascade layer for anything else<br>
&lt;dael> florian: I don't think we have concensus. I'm happy with layers but not everyone is on that page. Back to GH to think?<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Not hearing consensus to change, but also not for layer. I think we keep this open for a while.<br>
&lt;dael> jensimmons: Feels like a thing where it helps to write code and live with it and user test. It needs baking.<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: I think let's keep GH open and see where discussion goes<br>

GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5840#issuecomment-768461293 using your GitHub account

Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 27 January 2021 17:51:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:42:25 UTC