Re: [CSS3] Flexible Flow Module, proposal.

Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com> wrote:
> 
> How is
> 
>    width: calc(100px + 1fl);
> 
> different from
> 
>    width: 1fl;
>    min-width: 100px;

It may or may not be semantically different; I claim my version is
easier to understand.

> I do not see how use of '*' makes syntax worse. What exactly is
> causing problems in your opinion?

Not fitting into the DIMENSION production will cause trouble down the
road.

> About 'fl'. lowercase 'L' is not desirable in length units as it is 
> close to the '1' in monospaced fonts. And 'f' belongs to hex digits -
> may cause some inconsistencies in future.

I'm not insisting on 'fl'.  I am, however, insisting on an IDENT.

> I even would allow use of '*' without any number with the meaning that
> '*' alone is exact equivalent of '1*'

Even worse for the grammar.

> Allowance of '-' in names in CSS created precedent that we need to
> deal with forever. I mean that handling of '*' is exactly the same as 
> handling '-' as part of name token and as a minus sign.

One special case is far better than two.  Once you have two, it is
harder and harder to argue against more.

zw