- From: Sebastian Zartner via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2026 00:39:49 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> @fantasai you disagree with the proposed async resolution. For clarity, do you object to us taking this resolution? My interpretation of @fantasai's last comments is that she's advocating for consistency in regard of favoring the two-value syntax, while they are ambigious regarding whether we should continue adding single-keyword aliases or not. Unfortunately, I can't see a way to fulfill that criteria together with the proposed resolution. > > it's a little silly to call them legacy if we're still adding them > > This. That's true. And it is one reason people didn't like the alias to get added in the first place. > > In general, the CSSWG intends to support new display modes with the two value syntax only, > > This was our intention ten years ago, and ten years is a long time ago. If we're not willing to go along with that intention now, why does it make sense to keep that intention on the books? What makes us think that we would follow through on that intention in the future, if we aren't going to follow through on it now? So this basically boils down to whether we want to continue advocating for the two-value syntax or not. Currently, the group obviously disagrees in that point. And with the proposed resolution we tried to find a middleground. I just want to restate the initial resolution we took: > RESOLVED: remove inline-grid-lanes for now, but we are open to adding it again if there is evidence it solves a problem This was already a good compromise, in my opinion, which would keep the consistency @fantasai is asking for. And I still didn't read a strong argument against that. This resolution could be interpreted as "let's try to continue pushing the two-value syntax but if we're not successful, finally give up on that". And I believe, we're not at the point to give up yet, especially as the two-value syntax is still pretty new to authors and we therefore simply don't know yet how the uptake of it will be in the near future. So again, what's the reason to _not_ go with only the two-value syntax for now and see if people complain, and _then_ reconsider introducing new single-keyword values and with that give up on calling them legacy? Sebastian -- GitHub Notification of comment by SebastianZ Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10961#issuecomment-3939794028 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Sunday, 22 February 2026 00:39:50 UTC