- From: Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
- Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 02:39:52 +0400
- To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>,Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>,www-style@w3.org
17.02.2012, 21:35, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>: > On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 5:33 AM, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> wrote: > >> šI agree, I've said in the past that I think this is the best idea for >> š"variables" in CSS that I've seen put forward. >> >> šMinor editorial type comments on the current state of the draft: >> >> šI mentioned this a few months ago, but I would like to reiterate: šI >> šthink it is definitely worth going to some measure to ensure an >> šunderstanding of the actual relationship between data properties in >> šCSS and data properties in HTML as I can easily see confusion here >> šwith people doing something like: >> >> šš š<div data-foo="something"> >> >> šand then expecting to be able to say: >> >> šš šdiv{ >> šš š š š šproperty: šdata(foo); >> šš š} >> >> šOr vice versa. > > Naming is still somewhat up in the air. šWe may just change the name > entirely, to var-* or something. šIf we don't, then I think it would > be good to add a note saying that it's merely a surface resemblance. I think var- prefix is MUCH more intuitive, appropriate and preferable for CSS variables than data-. Using data- prefix for CSS-variables would be both confusing for authors and harmful for ability to add possible future features like described by Brian (<div data-foo="something"> => div{property: data(foo);}). Also, I'm not sure at all that new syntax is really any better than @-syntax proposed initially: http://disruptive-innovations.com/zoo/cssvariables/
Received on Friday, 17 February 2012 22:40:26 UTC