- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <andrew.fedoniouk@live.com>
- Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 09:33:10 -0800
- To: "Daniel Glazman" <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, <www-style@w3.org>
Daniel, I believe your document should mention prior art either - various proposals on the lists for constants/macro definitions in CSS: http://wiki.csswg.org/ideas/constants But I shall admit that no one asked for exactly variables So that "spherical horse in the Vacuum" [1] of yours can probably be considered as having no prior art. [1] http://www.fortunecity.co.uk/meltingpot/jinx/399/jokes/Education/Physicists.html -- Andrew Fedoniouk http://terrainformatica.com -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Glazman Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2011 12:29 AM To: www-style@w3.org Subject: variables/mixins in chrome I'm reading http://www.xanthir.com/blog/b49w0 and I am really surprised to read "the time until this starts showing up in nightly builds of Webkit is measurable in months"... Your cross-css/javascript variables proposal raises a few important concerns and I think the whole thing should be discussed in the WG _BEFORE_ Google starts implementing it. Last thing, I really dislike when a new proposal does not give back to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, in other terms when references are not present. It's a question of politeness, correctness and document quality. The original proposal for CSS Variables is [1]. [1] http://disruptive-innovations.com/zoo/cssvariables/ </Daniel>
Received on Saturday, 5 February 2011 17:34:05 UTC