- From: Lea Verou via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:39:00 +0000
- To: public-houdini-archive@w3.org
> I think this is a very compelling reason to keep it this way. The API will most likely be (ab)used in JS land anyway, and I think justifying there "redundant" prefixes would result in bad UX. I agree regarding redundant prefixes, that would be a terrible idea. However, I don't think the inconsistency is as bad as it was for variables, since it's between different languages. It's a much more common model to have JS Houdini scripts enabling features that CSS authors use without having written the JS or even looked at it, than it is to have CSS authors use variables they neither defined nor can read the definition of (the latter is pretty much impossible, since both definition and reference points are in CSS). -- GitHub Notification of comment by LeaVerou Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/751#issuecomment-380068299 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2018 11:39:04 UTC