- From: Simetrical <simetrical@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:24:47 -0400
- To: "Francois Remy" <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>
- Cc: "James Elmore" <James.Elmore@cox.net>, "www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Francois Remy
<fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> I don't like $varName. I much prefer var(varName);
I don't care, honestly. var() is more CSS-style. I just prefer
$varName over =varName or =varName=.
> If we choose for var(varName), it will be possible later to add some other
> functions like :
>
> var(oHeight + '5px')
> or
> var(oWidth * 3)
> or
> var('10%' - ('50px' * 2))
> or
> color: var(iif(isDefined('tColor'), tColor, 'blue'))
You mean like the already-existing calc() function? calc(
var(oHeight) + 5px ) or calc( $oHeight + 5px ) or whatnot should
already work, in browsers that support calc() as well as variables,
since variables are just another data type. I assume that's the
intent, anyway.
The last one can just be
color: blue;
color: tColor;
since the second statement will be silently dropped if tColor is
undefined. Adding generic conditionals would probably make CSS
Turing-complete, which I believe is something that's intentionally
avoided to ensure simplicity and speed. If you need complex
conditionals that actually require things like iif(), that's what
JavaScript is for.
> PS : I'm not against $varName as shortcut of var(varName);
Keeping one syntax for doing one thing should definitely be a goal
here. Pick one or the other, don't take the "add all the syntaxes
people might like and let them pick" approach.
Received on Friday, 18 July 2008 20:25:25 UTC