- From: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:46:24 -0500
- To: Brad Kemper <brkemper.comcast@gmail.com>
- Cc: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, "www-style@w3.org List" <www-style@w3.org>
We've already had a regression in WebKit from the $ syntax. People make $ typos in stylesheets apparently. :( I think the function syntax is the least likely to cause backwards compatibility issues. dave On Aug 22, 2008, at 2:39 PM, Brad Kemper wrote: > > > On Aug 22, 2008, at 11:07 AM, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com > > wrote: > >> >> David Hyatt wrote: >> >>> (1) -webkit-var(foo) >>> (2) =foo= >>> (3) $foo >>> One concern about using a symbol to represent a variable is that >>> there is no way to vendor-prefix it. Then again, just using a >>> symbol like = or $ looks nicer than the ugly "-webkit-var" notation. >> >> It also looks terribly more dangerous because some server modules >> already use such syntax for macro expansion on the server's side... >> Honestly, I think 2 and 3 are not a good idea. >> >> </Daniel> > > They use the equal sign notation? I thought that was fairly unique > (which was also one of the criticisms about it). > > Even with the dollar sign, is macro expansion really that fragile? > What if you want to represent a dollar amount in your HTML? Wouldn't > you just escape the $ in both cases? Unexpanded macros would never > make it into the final rendered css, right? >
Received on Friday, 22 August 2008 19:47:06 UTC