- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:15:43 -0400
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 4/13/11 1:35 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Boris Zbarsky<bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: >> On 4/11/11 4:55 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >>> >>> Yeah, compat's always an issue. I'd prefer trying for the (imo) >>> better API first, though, and only giving up and switching to the >>> version on window when we learn that there's a problem. >> >> If browsers ship every 6 weeks, then we probably learn that there is a >> problem after two releases have shipped... > > And then we can fix it 6 weeks later, rather than a year or two later. ^_^ From what I've seen so far, we then say "but we've shipped it in two releases already; we can't change it anymore." >> We can, sure. But if all the use cases for one are also use cases for the >> other, then we should ask ourselves whether we need a web API for the former >> if the latter won't be doable with web APIs anyway. > > So you're arguing that disabling rulesets is possibly reasonable for a > web API, but disabling individual properties is probably only useful > for full-on editors which will need specialized non-web-facing APIs > anyway, so can just put the functionality in the latter APIs? Yes. > For example, assume you're defining some sort of ruleset nesting, like this: Oh, I see what you were talking about. OK. My concern was actually about things that don't look like property-value pairs now (in the sense that the part before ':' is not an ident) but might end up as property-value pairs in the future if we extend CSS. -Boris
Received on Wednesday, 13 April 2011 18:16:11 UTC