- From: Brad Kemper <brkemper.comcast@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:57:16 -0700
- To: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
- Cc: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, "www-style@w3.org List" <www-style@w3.org>
You're saying Wekit is now responsible for author typos? With a typo the author will not get what they expected regardless of this proposal. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 22, 2008, at 12:46 PM, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com> wrote: > 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 19:58:04 UTC