Re: WhatTF > EXTF

Hi all,
This is an exciting topic to me.

"Extensibility" seems too generic, because extensibility can be achieved 
at different levels (lower/higher than or equal to current CSS), and by 
different methods (declarative or procedural).
I think this list focuses on a low-level and procedural ways, right?

So my suggestions to the name are:

* Low-Level CSS
   Inspired by "LLVM". However "level" already means another thing in 
CSS specs.

* Low-Level Layout API (for Web)
   We usually call the kernel of a browser "layout engine", and it is 
the low-level API hooked into the the engine's layout algorithm. However 
the name is not obviously related to web or CSS, maybe "Low-Level Layout 
API for Web" is better?

* Programmable CSS
   This is easy to understand and retains the keyword "CSS". There is 
already a (less powerful) JS API for CSS - CSSOM, so this name looks 
like an enhancement to CSSOM, maybe good or not.

Regards,
     Duan Yao.

在 2014年12月09日 08:49, Rossen Atanassov 写道:
> We've heard a number of unhappy comments about the name we chose for this taskforce and this was somewhat by design. First, we didn't really have a good name for it, and second we wanted to have the input of more people.
>
> In my intro mail I talked about some of the things that we want to tackle and it all comes down to the extensibility of CSS. Defining exactly what the box tree is (it is quite different in non-khtml implementations trust me), page box, box model, relation with styles, lifetime etc. In addition we're interested in the OM that would allow script to manipulate these objects without having to necessary go through DOM (there are a lot more boxes than elements in fragmentation for example).
>
> Since it is all about the extensibility of CSS we propose to rename the taskforce to Extensibility Taskforce or EXTF for short (the extf.org is already secured by us).
>
> Opinions?
>
> Thanks,
> Rossen

Received on Tuesday, 9 December 2014 05:22:06 UTC