- From: Mike Wilson <mikewse@hotmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 09:14:37 +0200
- To: "'David Hyatt'" <hyatt@apple.com>, "'Anne van Kesteren'" <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: <www-style@w3.org>
David Hyatt wrote: > Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > Mike Wilson wrote: > > > The discussion in the meeting notes > > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Sep/0075.html > > > was kind of brief regarding some of the technical problems with the > > > original CSS Vars suggestion. > > > > Well, the CSSOM problem is significant. > > What problem? > > You can relax the one-value-per-property-per-declaration-block rule > when dealing with variable declaration blocks. Hi David, Anne hasn't replied back yet on what he sees as the main obstacles in CSSOM, but is your above mention of "one-value-per-property-per- declaration-block" what you think could be one of them? Excuse me if getting this wrong, but in the below example would that problem be that complicatedVariable, instead of having "one" value, contains an extra block level with property assignments? @define { simpleVariable: green; otherSimpleVariable: blue; complicatedVariable { background-color: red; color: blue; } } If that is indeed the problem, maybe that could be resolved by a small adjustment to the syntax: @define { simpleVariable: green; otherSimpleVariable: blue; } @define complicatedVariable { background-color: red; color: blue; } Ie, a @define without an identifier makes a simple variable from each child, and @define with an identifier makes one complex variable from the whole declaration. > it's not difficult to envision how > the CSS OM for them might work. Yes, I also think it would be quite possible (and desired) for CSSOM to reflect this in a nice way, especially considering CSSOM being far from REC. But we would really need to hear from Anne about this. I would think the question should be about how to best integrate variables with the "core" of CSS, rather than look for problems in the current API whose aim is to reflect it. But maybe I am missing something? (quite probable) Best regards Mike Wilson
Received on Tuesday, 30 September 2008 07:15:21 UTC