- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 23:33:20 -0700
- To: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Bert Bos wrote: > > Daniel Glazman wrote: > >> http://disruptive-innovations.com/zoo/cssvariables/ > > Here are a few principles I hold dear: > > The smaller CSS is, the better. A smaller CSS is easier to learn, easier > to implement and has a better chance of being interoperable. > > If some feature can be done outside of CSS, especially a feature that is > useful for other technologies than CSS, then is it should be done > outside of CSS. Modularity avoids implementing things twice, allows > parallel developments and re-use. I think that this @const/@vars feature is exactly what is needed to support modularity on CSS level. I suspect that even relatively simple system of styles used on w3c.org will benefit if @const/@vars would be supported widely. > > Indirection is bad, because too few people understand it. Half the > people don't understand that EM refers to a style rule in a different > file and that that style rule makes the text italic. Every further > indirection we add halves our audience. > Beg my pardon but cascading in CSS is indirection too. And I would not tell for sure what is harder to comprehend: cascading or symbolic names for entities. > > Variables in CSS are wrong for the above three reasons. They make the > language bigger and more difficult to learn, they make other people's > style sheets more difficult to understand and re-use. They can instead > be done with a generic macro processor and would then be useful for > other languages, too (HTML, SVG, Javascript, Atom, etc.). They introduce > extra indirections. I would like to see that macro processor that I can use on my site running WordPress, BBPress, DokuWiki and my own PHPisms. Problem is not in macro processing but in CSS itself - multiple modules cannot be glued together because CSS simply does not provide such a glue. > > Computer scientists love indirections, they believe all problems can be > solved with them, but normal people hate them. Programmers program their > video recorders, normal people prefer to press the Record button at the > right moment. Programmers use text editors, normal people use Direct > Manipulation interfaces (what's often incorrectly referred to as WYSIWYG). > Sorry but how "normal people" and CSS design are related? -- Andrew Fedoniouk. http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Wednesday, 9 April 2008 06:54:25 UTC