- From: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 12:07:18 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 7/6/05, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au> wrote: > Orion Adrian wrote: > > On 7/5/05, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > >>Yes, you are, so long as you use a vendor prefix, e.g. > >> > >> -orion-layout: rect(0,0,100%,100%); > > > > But then the only way to remove the -orion- part is to get it approved > > by the W3C. Frankly, I don't think it's very usable to have all my > > properties start out with the same text. > > Would you rather you were allowed to define properties without any > prefix? Say, for example, you define and implement a 'layout' property > in your own system. Then what happens when the CSSWG decides that they > want to introduce a 'layout' property aswell, but need to define it > differently from the way you've implemented it? > > -- > Lachlan Hunt > http://lachy.id.au/ This is a problem because CSS can apply to any language. If CSS's scope were limited with each language specifying it's own properties there wouldn't be a conflict. It's a different approach. It would be a move away from "any property for any element" to "a set of properties for a set of elements". -- Orion Adrian
Received on Wednesday, 6 July 2005 16:07:35 UTC