- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <andrew.fedoniouk@live.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 19:59:45 -0800
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Cc: <www-style@w3.org>
>-----Original Message----- >From: Tab Atkins Jr. >Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 12:52 PM >To: Andrew Fedoniouk >Cc: www-style@w3.org >Subject: Re: [css-variables] Hidden costs. > >On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk ><andrew.fedoniouk@live.com> wrote: >> The problem is that no one of Web designers actually asked about exactly >> CSS >> Variables >> (run-time interpretable entities). Except of authors of this bright >> idea - >> Daniel Glazman et al. >> of course. But there are a lot of requests for CSS Constants (parse time >> macro variables). >> Just note various existing CSS macro/preprocessors and absence of >> anything >> even close to CSS variables (they can be modeled in principle by JS >> means). > >Actually, they have. An example given by an internal developer was a >table with lots of values, where some cells represented data from one >source, other cells represented data from a different source, etc. >Based on XHR data, the cells representing a source should all change >color in a particular way. > >Right now the only way to do that is to either (1) loop through the >elements, setting the .style directly, or (2) use the OM to directly >tweak the color declaration in the stylesheet. > >Neither is optimal. Term "optimal" when used alone tells us nothing, right? >From memory consumption point of view 3bit is clearly more optimal than 33bit. From CPU/memory resources consumption CSS vars (but not CSS consts) are too greedy without doing any good to 99.9(9)% sites and so web users. One particular problem of particular web developer that can be solved in 5 lines of JS code against global warming effects caused by increased and unconditional memory/CPU demands on each UA connected to the web. Kind of pathetic of course but ... And in general size matters indeed if to consider cases like this: http://terrainformatica.com/forums/topic.php?id=1776 > >Outside of the direct JS case, parse-time effects outside of the base >syntax are weird and harder for authors to predict. Late-loading of >stylesheets, for example, has difficult-to-predict results if variable >resolution happens solely at parse time. > I've implemented CSS constants year ago or so. And we see no conflicts and problems you have mentioned since then. Their specification is exactly this: http://wiki.csswg.org/ideas/constants Scope of @const declaration is a style sheet where it is declared and it is seen in all descendant style sheets loaded from it through the @import. So there are no ordering problems that you've mentioned. At parse time of the loaded style sheet all constants that it can use are known already. Or I did not get your statement... -- Andrew Fedoniouk http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Thursday, 17 February 2011 04:00:19 UTC