- From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 09:53:14 +0100
- To: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, "public-wtf@w3.org" <public-wtf@w3.org>
On 28/12/14 21:22, Brian Kardell wrote: > The simplest answer, to me, seems to be that you'd have to define things > upfront, that is - before you actually parsed the rule into some kind of > OM, else it would be unknown and lost as it is today. If this is the > route taken, then it's probably worth figuring out just how that > integrates without much complexity. Absolutely. I hope we can rely on the rules' order to do that. We had a similar issue in the original CSS Variables proposal (from Hyatt and myself) where @variables at-rules had to happen before all others. There are other options, of course; we could for instance (only thinking out loud here) introduce a new mimetype for CSS extensions. </Daniel>
Received on Monday, 29 December 2014 08:53:39 UTC