- From: Mike Sierra <letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 11:28:03 -0500
- To: Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com>
- Cc: Chris Mills <cmills@opera.com>, Paul Irish <paulirish@google.com>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>, Jonathan Garbee <jonathan@garbee.me>
Re #5, I modified my list of suggested template/design enhancements (http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Proposals/css_prop_enhancements) to capture what kind of changes they are & help decide which are more important. SKIN is for minor CSS tweaks; TEMPLATE has to do with how content generates in the final page; FORM has to do with any necessary modifications to how content is input. --Mike Sierra On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:04 PM, Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com> wrote: > I also just added more steps to the CSS Property Milestone plan [1] to > capture the work to prove out this page design on a few other articles, and > also to implement the necessary template changes. > > [1] http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Tasks/CSS_Property_Milestone > > > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com> > wrote: >> >> I sat down to provide detailed commentary on this page, and... I don't >> really have much. :-) >> >> It looks great overall to me. >> >> Here are a few random thoughts: >> >> How does the very short right-aligned description relate to the one-line >> overview? They seem to substantially overlap in terms of information in this >> case, although I could imagine the overview might have more information for >> more complicated properties. >> The "See CSS Text Styling Fundamentals for an overview." looks a bit out >> of place as a prose parenthetical tacked on the end. Should that be >> presented in a more structured way? >> The green check marks draw a bit too much attention because that all of >> the other cells in the overview table are just text. >> We need to carefully think about the compatibility table design; this is a >> complex area and we shouldn't jump into a given design without considering >> the consequences. Font-size is a pretty straightforward property, but other >> complications to consider include: how to show that support started prefixed >> at one version and unprefixed at another, as well as how to include >> information about sub-compatiblity information. For example, MDN's >> box-shadow page [1] has four separate rows for basic support, multiples, >> inset, and spread radius. That said, I like this compatibility design a fair >> bit; the use of color for supported status makes it work both at a glance >> and when you want specific versions. >> >> Thanks for doing such an awesome job on this! >> >> --Alex >> >> [1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/CSS/box-shadow >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:23 AM, Chris Mills <cmills@opera.com> wrote: >>> >>> Thanks for your continued work on this Mike - your comments all make >>> sense to me. Just one specific thing you asked for comment on: >>> >>> The question of font-size: 62.5% versus font-size: 10px - this is a good >>> point, and I think that these days it makes very little difference; it used >>> to be that in the old days, using pixel sizes was bad because old IE >>> versions couldn't zoom content sized in this way. But that is a problem of >>> the past, pretty much. >>> >>> Chris Mills >>> Opera Software, dev.opera.com >>> W3C Fellow, web education and webplatform.org >>> Author of "Practical CSS3: Develop and Design" (http://goo.gl/AKf9M) >>> >>> On 22 Jan 2013, at 22:20, Mike Sierra <letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Mike Sierra >>> > <letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Mike Sierra >>> >> <letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Great comments. Replies inline marked SIERRA below. I think it's >>> >>> wise >>> >>> to keep a tally of the major template/skin enhancements necessary to >>> >>> produce this suggested design -- will do that. >>> >> >>> >> As promised, a list of features needed to fine-tune the design: >>> > >>> > At Julee's suggestion, I captured these suggestions as a proposal here: >>> > >>> > http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Proposals/css_prop_enhancements >>> > >>> > --Mike Sierra >>> >>> >> >
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2013 16:28:36 UTC