- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 09:30:25 -0700
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: François REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>, www-style@w3.org
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 5:35 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote: > On Sunday 2012-08-12 22:37 +0200, François REMY wrote: >> The main issue is that this loop back. You have to resolve all >> matching rules to know what the value of "matches" is, but then you >> have to rematch again, which may changes the value of "matches" >> again. Potentially, this can become an inifinite loop. > > So the 'matches' wasn't intended to be a normal property: the idea > was that it would be additive rather than cascading/overriding; I > think Tab's @-rule syntax might be better. > > (I actually started writing the email hoping to post no syntax at > all, but couldn't figure out an easy way to do so.) > Ah, ok. We have two processing options for such features in principle: So called @const - C pre-processor kind of parsing. "@const name tokens;" declaration is a named sequence of parsed tokens that gets injected at @name; location. And run-time @var name single-value; thing. It gets parsed into the value and used as named reference at run-time. Changing the value through CSSOM will changed all rules where such var is used. It appears as your $match idea is just a specialization of @const see: http://wiki.csswg.org/ideas/constants#const-at-rule. May be its time to return to @const ideas? -- Andrew Fedoniouk. http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Monday, 13 August 2012 16:30:55 UTC